cps energy: pending final save for tomorrow approval energy plan (“step… · 2020-01-11 · cps...

CPS Energy:

Save for Tomorrow Energy Plan (“STEP”) Program Review

November 2019

Pending Final Review and Approval

CPS ENERGY: SAVE FOR TOMORROW ENERGY PLAN (STEP) PROGRAM REVIEW

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

KEY FINDINGS .................................................................................................................................... IV

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................... V

I. STEP ACHIEVEMENTS................................................................................................................. 1

Demand and Energy Savings ......................................................................................................... 2

Cost-Effectiveness .......................................................................................................................... 6

Community Benefits ..................................................................................................................... 12

II. PROGRAM PERFORMANCE ..................................................................................................... 18

Methodology ................................................................................................................................. 21

Performance Highlights ................................................................................................................ 22

Incentive Levels ............................................................................................................................ 25

III. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS .................................................................................................. 28

Reporting Adjustments ................................................................................................................. 28

IV. CONCLUSION.............................................................................................................................. 30

APPENDICES ...................................................................................................................................... 31

Appendix A: Program Descriptions .............................................................................................. 31

Appendix B: Program-Level Summary Tables ............................................................................. 37

Appendix C: Local Job Creation ................................................................................................... 57

Appendix D: Emission Reduction Equivalency Results ............................................................... 63

Appendix E: Cost-Effectiveness Heat Maps ................................................................................ 64


ii

TABLE OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Cumulative Demand Savings (MW) ...................................................................................... vi Figure 2. Cumulative STEP Performance and Goals ............................................................................ 2

Figure 3. Cumulative STEP Demand Savings ....................................................................................... 3

Figure 4. Annual STEP Demand Savings ............................................................................................. 4 Figure 5. Annual Active Total STEP Energy Savings ............................................................................ 5

Figure 6. Annual First-Year STEP Energy Savings ............................................................................... 5

Figure 7. Cumulative STEP Demand Savings vs. 2008 Potential Study .............................................. 6

Figure 8. Cumulative STEP Expenditure ............................................................................................... 7 Figure 9. Average UCT Ratio for Top Performing Programs ................................................................ 8

Figure 10. Annual STEP Cost of Demand Saved ................................................................................. 9

Figure 11. Average Cost of Demand Saved for Top Performing Programs .......................................... 9

Figure 12. Annual Thermostat Program Cost of Demand Saved ........................................................ 10

Figure 13. Annual STEP Cost of Lifetime Energy Saved .................................................................... 11

Figure 14. Average Cost of Energy Saved for Top Performing Programs .......................................... 11

Figure 15. Reduction in Revenue Requirement (RRR) from STEP .................................................... 12

Figure 16. Annual Local Job Impacts, FY 2009-FY 2019 .................................................................... 15

Figure 17. Cumulative STEP Emissions Reductions .......................................................................... 16

Figure 18. Top 15 Programs by Demand Savings .............................................................................. 18 Figure 19. Top 5 Programs Contribution to Annual Demand Savings ................................................ 19

Figure 20. Top 15 Programs by Energy Savings ................................................................................ 19

Figure 21. Top 5 Programs’ Contribution to Annual Energy Savings ................................................. 20

Figure 22. Cost-Effectiveness of Selected Programs .......................................................................... 23 Figure 23. IMPLAN Model Schematic.................................................................................................. 58

Figure 24. Local Job Impacts, FY 2009-FY 2019 ................................................................................ 61


iii

TABLE OF TABLES

Table 1. Annual First-Year Emissions Reductions .............................................................................. viii Table 2. Annual STEP Utility Cost Test (UCT) Ratios ......................................................................... viii

Table 3: Annual STEP Utility Cost Test (UCT) Ratios ........................................................................... 7

Table 4. Economic Analysis Inputs, FY 2009-FY 2019 ($ million). ..................................................... 14 Table 5. Bill Savings, FY 2020-FY 2048 ($ million). ............................................................................ 14

Table 6. Annual Total Emissions Reduction, FY 2009-2019 ............................................................... 17

Table 7. Industry Awards ..................................................................................................................... 21

Table 8. HVAC Rebate Level ............................................................................................................... 26 Table 9. Smart Thermostat Rebate Level ............................................................................................ 26

Table 10. Lighting Rebate Levels ........................................................................................................ 27

Table 11. Weatherization Rebate Levels ............................................................................................. 27

Table 12. Solar Rebate Levels ............................................................................................................ 27

Table 13. Economic Analysis Inputs, FY 2009-FY 2019 ($ million). ................................................... 58

Table 14. Bill Savings, FY 2020-FY 2048 ($ million). .......................................................................... 59

Table 15. Net FY 2009-FY 2019 Economic Impacts (2019 $ millions). .............................................. 60

Table 16.Gross FY 2009-FY 2019 Economic Impact (2019 $ millions). ............................................. 60

Table 17. Net FY 2009-FY 2048 Economic Impact (2019 $ millions). ................................................ 61

Table 18: Gross FY 2009-FY 2048 Economic Impact (2019 $ millions). ............................................ 62

TABLE OF PICTURES

Picture 1: Customer Care Fair ............................................................................................................... v

Picture 2. SolarHostSA Installation ...................................................................................................... vii

Picture 3. Rebates for School DR Projects ........................................................................................... ix Picture 4: FY 2019 Gross Emissions Reduction Equivalent Infographic ............................................ 15

https://icfonline.sharepoint.com/teams/CPSSTEPProgramReview/Shared%20Documents/General/Deliverables/Draft%208/STEP%20Review%20Report_DRAFT_19-10-29.docx#_Toc23174385


iv

KEY FINDINGS

The CPS Energy Save for Tomorrow Energy Plan (“STEP”) was established in 2009 by an

ordinance of the City Council of San Antonio. The ordinance requires CPS Energy to save 771 MW

of electricity demand by 2020 at a cost of no more than $849 million. Key achievements of STEP to

date include:

STEP is on track to achieve

the required demand

savings one year early,

and approximately

15% under the budget cap.

STEP saved a gross total of

1.4 TWh of electricity in FY

2019 - enough energy to

power 104,000 Greater San

Antonio Area households

for the year. Over the life of

STEP so far, it has yielded

6.3 TWh of electricity savings.

STEP has provided over

$553 million in net benefits

(the difference between the

present value of the energy

and capacity savings and

the program cost) putting

downward pressure on

current and future

CPS Energy revenue

requirements.

Over the FY 2009 to FY 2019

time period, STEP had a

Utility Cost Test benefit cost

ratio of 1.9, indicating that

STEP provided $1.93 of

benefit for every $1

invested by CPS Energy.

STEP resulted in an

estimated annual 680 added

jobs and $28 million in

income from FY 2009 to

FY 2019. Over the duration

of STEP, it has cumulatively

generated 7,500 local job-

years, $312 million in labor

income, and $362 million in

added value in addition

to the utility net benefits

noted above.

The CO2 emissions

reductions from STEP is

approximately 3,366,000

(short) tons, which is

equivalent to the carbon

sequestered by 3,594,000

acres of forest for one year.

Additionally, STEP has

reduced SO2 emissions by

6,639,000 lbs. and NOX

emissions by 3,123,000 lbs.

This report only includes data that has already been verified by third-party evaluators. As such, any data from FY 2020 or later are not included. Where projections are used, they are highlighted as such.


v

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Over the past decade, CPS Energy has made significant progress in achieving its demand reduction goals, rapidly growing the energy conservation portfolio into a robust collection of programs that serve its diverse population and provide an opportunity for all customers to benefit. Since the passage of the Save for Tomorrow Energy Plan (STEP) in 2009, CPS Energy has embraced the challenge set forth in the ordinance to save 771 MW by 2020 and has achieved greater savings than those forecasted by a potential study conducted in 2008.

CPS Energy is on track to achieve the savings goal one year early and at a cost approximately 15 percent under budget.

This achievement speaks to the willingness of CPS Energy to test new program concepts and continuously improve its programs to incorporate lessons learned, new technologies, evolving delivery models, and emerging best practices. STEP has also benefitted from having a consistent and significant funding source. A prime example of this continuous improvement is CPS Energy’s transition to a Bring-Your-Own-Device (BYOD) model for smart thermostats. When first launched in 2003, customers could elect to have a CPS Energy contractor visit the home and install a qualifying thermostat. The transition to a BYOD model opens the program to a broader range of devices and significantly reduces the implementation cost, allowing the program to serve more customers at a lower unit cost. With continuous improvements like this, including taking advantage of declines in the cost of efficient technologies such as LED lightbulbs, CPS Energy has established a broad, balanced, and well-performing portfolio that provides a solid foundation for future innovation.

Consistent with national best practices, the STEP program offers incentives and assistance to residential and commercial customers to encourage them to reduce demand for power through adoption of a wide variety of energy efficient and clean energy technologies and behaviors. Reflecting CPS Energy’s commitment to the community, the portfolio includes multiple program options for residents living in apartments, renters, and low to moderate income customers.

Picture 1: Customer Care Fair

Source: CPS Energy


vi

Further, the evolution of the STEP portfolio since its inception has generally been consistent with broad industry trends toward decarbonization and the adoption of distributed and renewable resources. The focus on demand reduction, as opposed to energy savings, and inclusion of solar energy, puts CPS Energy in a strong position to explore future demand side management opportunities. Such future programs may also expand the options available to customers, support market and economic growth, and facilitate CPS Energy’s “Flexible Path” strategy, which relies on a diversity of technologies and approaches to meet the Greater San Antonio Area’s future power needs.

Through FY 2019, CPS Energy’s efforts have resulted in cumulative demand savings of 714 MW. This is higher than the annual output of two natural gas combined cycle units.1

This report only includes data that has already been verified by third-party evaluators. As such, any data from FY 2020 or later are not included. Where projections are used, they are discussed as such. Figure 1 highlights the increase in demand savings over time and the current trajectory to achieve the 771 MW goal in FY 2020 of the program - one year early.

Figure 1. Cumulative Demand Savings (MW)

As shown above, the largest contributors to the demand goals are the residential and commercial energy efficiency programs, followed by the demand response (DR) programs. On an annual basis, the DR programs contribute the greatest demand savings, but because they are only triggered on peak days, the savings do not accumulate year after year as is the case when installing high

1 This is roughly equivalent to the power of two advanced natural gas combined cycle (ANGCC) units, which are rated at 320 MW each. https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=39912

(100)

-

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019 FY 2020

MW

Sa

vin

gs

Residential Efficiency Commercial Efficiency Residential DR

Commercial DR Residential Solar Commercial Solar

Decay STEP 2020 Goal STEP Trajectory

https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=39912


vii

efficiency equipment. The difference between the program types is a strength, as the DR programs can respond quickly to shed load when needed for reliability or cost control, while the energy efficiency programs reduce the overall system load across all hours.

The solar programs are also experiencing strong growth. CPS Energy’s suite of solar programs provides a range of alternatives to customers interested in solar energy, including customers without the ability to host solar (through Roofless Solar) and those without the ability or desire to self-finance deployment (through SolarHostSA), while still supporting the traditional solar contracting and ownership model with its rebate program.

Collectively, peak demand savings from the solar programs grew over 500 percent since FY 2012.

Picture 2. SolarHostSA Installation

Source: CPS Energy

In addition to reducing demand, the programs saved an annual gross total of 1.4 TWh of electricity in FY 2019, resulting in carbon emission reductions of approximately 771,000 tons. This has the same emissions benefit as taking approximately 148,000 passenger vehicles off of the road for the year, planting nearly 11.6 million trees, or preserving 1.2 times the total National Forest and Grasslands area in Texas.2 Table 1 highlights the emissions reductions over time, including particulates that contribute to air pollution. Across all years so far, STEP has yielded a total net of 6.3 TWh of energy savings, resulting in 3,366,000 tons of carbon emissions reductions. This is equivalent to approximately 648,000 passenger vehicles off the road for a year or planting more than 50.5 million trees.

2 Calculated by entering into EPA’s greenhouse gas equivalencies calculator. For the trees, it is carbon sequestered over 10 years. https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gas-equivalencies-calculator

https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gas-equivalencies-calculator


viii

Table 1. Annual First-Year Emissions Reductions

CPS Energy achieved these results cost-effectively and at a cost roughly 15 percent below the budget cap, resulting in significant savings for CPS Energy customers.

For every $1 invested in STEP, there is $1.93 in benefit. In aggregate, the portfolio generated a total of $553 million in net benefits,

putting downward pressure on electric revenue requirements.

The impact of such programs on utility revenue requirements is commonly measured by the Utility Cost Test (UCT) ratio. The UCT ratio divides the present worth of program benefits (specifically the avoided costs of supplying energy and capacity) by the program costs. A UCT ratio greater than 1.0 indicates that the benefits of the program exceed the costs.

The UCT ratio for the STEP portfolio has been above 1.0 in all years, averaging 1.9 across all years, and has been trending steadily upward. Table 2 presents the annual UCT test results by program year.

Table 2. Annual STEP Utility Cost Test (UCT) Ratios

Additionally, the STEP program is supporting the Greater San Antonio Area’s economic growth. STEP provides jobs for local trade allies and incentives for participants to invest in a variety of energy efficient and clean energy technologies. These investments grow the market for energy services while producing significant bill savings for participants, which allows for greater consumer spending by households and continued investment by local businesses. These benefits are expected to grow over time as the bill savings persist, resulting in a cumulative $3.1 billion in economic value for the Greater San Antonio Area through FY 2048.

Cumulatively, between FY 2009 and FY 2019, STEP programs are estimated to have generated 7,500 local job-years and $642 million in economy-wide

benefits, including $312 million in labor income.

FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019

CO2 (tons) 44,506 45,788 36,798 46,382 65,922 56,816 73,707 58,486 112,966 121,470 120,481

NOX (lbs) 60,094 65,405 43,317 43,362 52,197 48,108 58,174 49,911 118,862 105,487 113,118

SO2 (lbs) 164,547 142,234 107,033 115,482 81,015 89,328 130,619 96,533 300,183 209,277 223,057

PM2.5 (lbs) 4,416 4,318 3,106 3,994 5,098 4,262 6,339 4,605 9,386 9,712 8,313

Emissions

Program Type FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019

Residential Efficiency 2.41 1.17 0.83 1.54 1.27 1.31 1.50 1.55

Commercial Efficiency 2.38 1.76 2.24 3.82 3.67 2.98 3.08 3.06

Residential DR 1.59 2.16 2.87 0.81 1.38 1.80 2.76 3.49

Commercial DR 1.11 0.94 0.93 1.34 2.37 2.26 2.54 2.29

Residential Solar 0.82 0.55 0.82 1.12 1.13 1.43 2.70 3.30

Commercial Solar 0.74 0.76 0.92 1.30 1.44 1.28 2.34 6.54

STEP Total 1.51 1.26 1.22 1.53 1.59 1.51 1.72 1.86 2.25 2.68


ix

As evidenced by its numerous awards, CPS Energy, enabled by STEP, has significantly ramped up the level of demand savings achieved in a relatively short amount of time. The past decade of programs have provided valuable experience and offer a robust framework for future expansion and innovation.

Picture 3. Rebates for School DR Projects

Source: CPS Energy


1

I. STEP ACHIEVEMENTS

The San Antonio City Council created STEP in 2009 in support of its environmental and economic

goals.3 The ordinance requires CPS Energy to save 771 MW of demand by 2020 at a cost of no more than $849 million.

The STEP Program is exceeding expectations by delivering savings faster than predicted and at a lower cost. This achievement is a testament to the ability of CPS Energy to engage the community, articulate the benefits of saving energy, and make it easy for Greater San Antonio Area residents to participate in programs. These benefits include:

• Lowering participating customers’ energy use and monthly bills

• Reducing fuel costs for all customers

• Delaying or avoiding the need for costly new generation capacity and the transmission infrastructure to serve it

• Supporting job creation and economic growth

• Reducing carbon emissions and air pollution

CPS Energy offers myriad opportunities for residents to save energy, ensuring that nearly all customers have an opportunity to participate regardless of their location within the city, their housing status (renters or homeowners), or socio-economic status. CPS Energy’s programs fall into three general categories, providing a diversity of options:

• Energy efficiency

• Demand response (DR)

• Solar energy

This report only includes data that has already been verified by third-party evaluators. As such, any data from FY 2020 or later are not included. Where projections are used, they are highlighted as such.

Taken together, through FY 2019, the STEP portfolio achieved 92 percent of its 2020 demand savings goal, reducing demand by 714 MW at 76 percent of the budget, for a total cost of $641 million over the ten-year period. Based on the trajectory of savings, it is anticipated that the 2020 goal will be achieved at roughly 85 percent of the cost cap, as illustrated in Figure 2.

3 City of San Antonio Ordinance #2009-05-21-399

https://webapp11.sanantonio.gov/rfcadocs/R_5033_20090602100303.pdf


2

Figure 2. Cumulative STEP Performance and Goals

This review of STEP performance begins with an analysis of the entire STEP portfolio as a whole. Later sections provide an analysis on a program-by-program basis.

Demand and Energy Savings

STEP achieved two main types of savings: demand savings and energy savings. Demand is how much power is used at any given moment in time, which is measured in Watts (W), and energy is the power used over a specific period of time, which is measured in Watt-hours (Wh). The ordinance establishing STEP specifies non-coincident peak demand savings of 771 MW by the year 2020 but does not set a goal for energy savings.

Demand Savings

The cumulative demand savings from STEP have increased steadily over the years of the program, reaching a total of 714 MW in FY 2019, as seen in Figure 3. This represents the total amount of demand saved thus far for each year of implementation and the progress towards the goal. As visible in the trajectory in Figure 3, CPS Energy is set to achieve the plan’s goal by 2019 (FY 2020) a year early.

$-

$100

$200

$300

$400

$500

$600

$700

$800

$900

-

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900


$ m

illi

on

s

MW

Sa

vin

gs

STEP Demand Savings Projection STEP Demand Savings STEP Savings Goal

STEP Expenditure Projection STEP Expenditure STEP Expenditure Limit


3

Figure 3. Cumulative STEP Demand Savings4

The annual incremental demand savings from STEP have increased close to three-fold in recent years as compared to the initial years. Annual incremental demand savings are approximately 306 MW per year in FY 2019, equivalent to approximately 6 percent of CPS Energy’s retail system peak demand.

Figure 4 presents an annual view of STEP savings, showing the incremental savings achieved in each year.

4 Decay represents the demand savings that are no longer active as an efficient measure reaches the end of its life. In the specific case above, new demand savings are added between FY 2009 and FY 2011 due to conversion of lighting from conventional incandescent bulbs to Compact Florescent Lights (CFLs). These savings decay when those measures reach the end of their life in FY 2014 to FY 2016. However, the loss of these measures allowed savings to be recaptured with more efficient LED lighting measures in the following years.

(100)

-

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900


MW

Sa

vin

gs



Decay STEP 2020 Goal STEP Trajectory


4

Figure 4. Annual STEP Demand Savings

Except for the initial year, DR programs have contributed the greatest to annual savings, as shown in the green portions in Figure 4. Based on FY 2019 program results, the largest DR programs in terms of annual peak demand savings are the Smart Thermostat programs for residential customers and C&I Demand Response for business customers.

DR programs have the explicit focus of shifting or reducing the demand for power at times of system peak, which typically occurs on the hottest summer days when the need for air conditioning is highest. The savings from DR programs are considered to have a single year lifetime, meaning that the savings are only counted in the first year. However, all participants can be counted as participating in each year, even if they have participated in previous years. In contrast, for efficiency and solar measures, any associated demand savings are spread across all years of the measure’s life, which can range from five to 25 years.

Energy Savings

CPS Energy has significantly increased energy savings over the years, reaching an annual gross total of 1.4 TWh in FY 2019 for all active measures5. Shown in Figure 5 are the annual net total energy savings. This is enough energy to power roughly 104,000 Greater San Antonio area homes for the year. Across all years of STEP so far, this has resulted in 6.3 TWh of energy savings. Because energy efficiency focuses on lowering total energy usage through more efficient equipment and behaviors, those programs contribute the most to the total energy savings. The contribution of solar programs is also growing, as more households and businesses adopt solar, which is accelerating the overall portfolio savings achieved relative to expectations. DR programs are the smallest contributors as their focus is on demand and they are only active during a limited number of hours per year.

5 The annual gross total of 1.4 TWh comes to an annual net total of 1.3 after accounting for free ridership and other adjustments in the net-to-gross ratio used to determine realized savings.

(100,000)

(50,000)

-

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000


kW S

avi

ngs

Residential Efficiency Commercial Efficiency Residential DR Commercial DR

Residential Solar Commercial Solar Decay


5

Figure 5. Annual Active Total STEP Energy Savings6

Annual first-year energy savings have increased significantly in recent years, reaching nearly 220 GWh per year, as shown in Figure 6. First-year energy savings account for only energy savings in that year from measures newly installed in that year. This is equivalent to approximately 1 percent of CPS Energy’s annual retail sales, which is significant because many utilities have yet to reach the 1 percent benchmark and many of the utilities who are achieving this level of savings have been consistently operating programs for much longer than CPS Energy.

Figure 6. Annual First-Year STEP Energy Savings

This dramatic increase in annual savings is partly explained by the addition of measures to the program mix that yield greater energy savings, such as water conserving faucet aerators and low-flow showerheads plus water heater and piping insulation. The single largest program type contributing to the annual energy savings has been commercial efficiency. The proportion of annual

6 Annual active total energy savings means the total energy savings in that year from all measures that remain active from STEP. Through FY 2013 this equates to a sum of all the annual first-year values. In FY 2014 the residential lighting measures begin to reach the end of their lifetime and no longer contribute new energy savings. By FY 2019, the annual active total energy savings exclude the first three years of residential lighting and the first year of commercial lighting because of measures reaching end of life.

-

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600


GW

h S

avi

ngs



-

50

100

150

200

250

300


GW

h S

avi

ngs




6

energy savings from commercial efficiency programs has fluctuated over time but has increased significantly in recent years.

Comparison to Potential Study

CPS Energy’s achievements are exceeding what a 2008 potential study estimated would be feasible and cost-effective.7 As illustrated in Figure 7, the demand savings achieved through residential efficiency programs have exceeded the potential estimates every year. The commercial efficiency programs have performed below the potential estimates, although in recent years they have been closing the gap. The savings associated with the DR and solar programs have more than made up for any shortfall in the commercial efficiency programs.

Figure 7. Cumulative STEP Demand Savings vs. 2008 Potential Study

Cost-Effectiveness

The STEP ordinance specifies a maximum cost of $849 million through the year 2020.8 As suggested by the trajectory in Figure 8, STEP expenditures to date have been tracking below the anticipated expenditures and are expected to remain below going forward, with total projected costs of approximately $719 million.

7 Nexant (2008), Demand Side Management Potential Study. The 2008 potential study only included energy efficiency, so STEP’s actual DR and solar demand savings are separate from those included in the potential study. 8 City of San Antonio Ordinance #2009-05-21-399

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Act

ual

Pote

ntia

l

Act

ual

Pote

ntia

l

Act

ua

l

Pote

ntia

l

Act

ua

l

Pote

ntia

l

Act

ual

Pote

ntia

l

Act

ual

Pote

ntia

l

Act

ua

l

Pote

ntia

l

Act

ua

l

Pote

ntia

l

Act

ual

Pote

ntia

l

Act

ual

Pote

ntia

l

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019

MW

Sa

vin

gs

Residential Efficiency Commercial Efficiency Residential DR Commercial DR

Residential Solar Commercial Solar Residential EE Potential Commercial EE Potential



7

Figure 8. Cumulative STEP Expenditure

Utility Cost Test

The impact of the programs on the present worth of future utility revenue requirements is often evaluated using the Utility Cost Test (UCT) ratio. The UCT ratio is the benefits, defined as the avoided cost of energy and demand, divided by the direct program costs. A UCT ratio greater than 1.0 indicates that the benefits of the program or portfolio exceed the costs.

The UCT ratio for the STEP portfolio has been above a 1.0 in all years and has been improving steadily each year, as shown in Table 3. The FY 2019 UCT ratio of 2.68 means that for every $1 invested by CPS Energy, there is $2.68 in direct benefits. The large jump seen for Commercial Solar between FY 2018 and FY 2019 is due to an increase in the size of the projects in FY 2019 compared to previous years. This increase in size paired with the rebate cap for commercial solar projects resulted in savings doubling to quadrupling while costs decreased slightly.

Table 3: Annual STEP Utility Cost Test (UCT) Ratios

Figure 9 presents the average UCT ratio across all program years for the top performing programs with regard to UCT.

$-

$100

$200

$300

$400

$500

$600

$700

$800

$900


$ m

illi

on

All STEP Residential Efficiency Commercial Efficiency

Residential DR Commercial DR Residential Solar

Commercial Solar STEP Goal STEP Trajectory

Program Type FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019

Residential Efficiency 2.41 1.17 0.83 1.54 1.27 1.31 1.50 1.55

Commercial Efficiency 2.38 1.76 2.24 3.82 3.67 2.98 3.08 3.06

Residential DR 1.59 2.16 2.87 0.81 1.38 1.80 2.76 3.49

Commercial DR 1.11 0.94 0.93 1.34 2.37 2.26 2.54 2.29

Residential Solar 0.82 0.55 0.82 1.12 1.13 1.43 2.70 3.30

Commercial Solar 0.74 0.76 0.92 1.30 1.44 1.28 2.34 6.54

STEP Total 1.51 1.26 1.22 1.53 1.59 1.51 1.72 1.86 2.25 2.68


8

Figure 9. Average UCT Ratio for Top Performing Programs

Until recently, each year a few program types tended to outperform all others by a large margin, though which program types outperformed would vary across the years. In recent years this variation has diminished, as the UCT ratio has generally improved for all program types.

Cost of Savings

The acquisition cost of savings is the total program cost divided by the total demand or energy savings and is expressed as $/kW of $/kWh saved. These metrics must be interpreted carefully since they attribute all costs to either the demand or energy savings and not both at once. The purpose of this is to allow comparison between the STEP savings and market costs of other resources. While demand savings and the cost of demand savings are the priority for the Greater San Antonio Area, the cost of energy savings has been evaluated as well.

Cost of Demand Saved

The annual cost of lifetime demand savings is quite variable across the years of STEP implementation, as visible in Figure 10. The average cost of demand saved was roughly $87/kW-yr, which is slightly above the ERCOT avoided capacity cost but, as previously indicated, this does not also account for the energy savings.


9

Figure 10. Annual STEP Cost of Demand Saved

Figure 11 shows the top performers in terms of cost of demand saved.

Figure 11. Average Cost of Demand Saved for Top Performing Programs

Figure 12 below provides another look at the improvement in program cost over time, specifically for the thermostat-based programs. The chart measures the $ per kW saved on a lifetime basis. This illustrates the improvements in cost of acquisition for the programs over time.

$-

$20

$40

$60

$80

$100

$120


$/k

W S

avi

ngs

$87/kW 1


10

Figure 12. Annual Thermostat Program Cost of Demand Saved

Cost of Energy Saved

The annual cost of lifetime energy savings is somewhat less variable than the corresponding demand cost but still shows a wide range of values over time, as seen in Figure 13. In the case of the cost of energy savings, the average was $0.044/kWh. Relative to other programs in the U.S., this cost of energy saved is on the higher end of the spectrum, but this is somewhat misleading as CPS Energy’s goals are based on demand reduction not energy savings and features a strong mix of DR programs, which typically have low or no energy savings. Additionally, CPS Energy’s portfolio includes a large low-income focused weatherization program, which meets an important community need, but has higher program costs.


11

Figure 13. Annual STEP Cost of Lifetime Energy Saved

Figure 14 provides a more detailed view of the average cost of energy saved across program years for the top performing programs.

Figure 14. Average Cost of Energy Saved for Top Performing Programs

$-

$0.010

$0.020

$0.030

$0.040

$0.050

$0.060

$0.070


$/k

Wh

Sa

vin

gs $0.044/kWh 1


12

Community Benefits

In FY 2019, STEP programs had a total of 275,000 customer interactions, with a total close to 1.4 million over the lifetime. This work with the community has provided significant benefit for customers of CPS Energy and for the region.

There are three main forms of benefits that STEP has provided to the community of San Antonio; financial benefits that come through as customer bill savings, local economic benefits in the form of jobs and boosts to the local economy, and environmental benefits from the reductions in emissions. Each of these are broken down in more detail in the following sections.

Financial Benefits

At the core of the community benefits are the financial benefits STEP provides to all Greater San Antonio Area residents. The standard way to measure the net financial benefits of energy conservation programs is to compare the costs avoided by the programs (that is, the costs that are saved by not needing to serve the conserved load) with the total cost to administer the program. CPS Energy refers to the difference between the present value of avoided costs over the lifetime of the measure and the program costs as the Reduction in Revenue Requirements (RRR), and is also referred to as the program net benefits. It represents the reduction in costs that CPS Energy will not need to collect from its customers, potentially putting downward pressure on revenue requirements.

As shown in Figure 15, the RRR has increased each year, resulting in significant cost savings to CPS Energy’s customers. STEP has generated a total of $553 million in net benefits, peaking at $139 million in the 2019 fiscal year. Values listed in Figure 15 are the annual lifetime net savings from measures installed in each year. The increase year on year is due to increased savings paired with smaller increases in expenditure.

Figure 15. Reduction in Revenue Requirement (RRR) from STEP

Local Economic Benefits

The STEP program is successfully supporting economic growth in the Greater San Antonio Area. STEP provides incentives for participants to invest in a variety of energy efficient and clean energy technologies. It is estimated that between FY 2009 and FY 2019, STEP programs have generated 7,500 local job-years (i.e. provided a year of employment for 7,500 people), $312 million in labor

$10 $7 $9

$31 $38

$49 $57

$94

$118

$139

$-

$20

$40

$60

$80

$100

$120

$140

$160


$ m

illi

on


13

income, and $362 million in added gross regional product. Taking into account the expected lifetime of the equipment installed through the program, local job creation will continue through approximately FY 2048 with a cumulative 23,440 net job-years and $1.7 billion in value added in the Greater San Antonio Area, including $1.1 billion in net labor income. On average, the annual net impact of the program is 590 jobs and $27 million in income between FY 2009 and FY 2048.

To evaluate the economic impact of STEP, the IMPLAN model was used to estimate how investments, savings, and costs of STEP have impacted the Greater San Antonio Area economy. The IMPLAN model is a widely-used economic impact model that traces spending through an economy and measures the cumulative effects of that spending on pre-specified economic regions, in this case the eight-county San Antonio Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). The model captures the fact that sectors are interdependent: one industry may purchase inputs from other industries and households (e.g., labor), and then produce and sell outputs to other industries, households, and government entities. Therefore, economic activity in one sector can cause an increased flow of money throughout the economy.

IMPLAN’s outputs include three types of impacts on the economy:

• Direct impacts, which are impacts in the primary industries where investments made by STEP and its participants are focused. For example, installing rooftop solar requires direct construction jobs.

• Indirect impacts, which are impacts in the industries that supply or interact with the primary industries. For example, building new energy efficient structures requires the purchase of construction-related building materials, which requires workers and output from sectors producing those materials.

• Induced impacts, which represent increased spending by workers who earn money due to the proposed projects, such as when construction workers use their wages at local restaurants.

STEP, over its lifetime and beyond, has impacted the region through multiple pathways, from investments in running the program to electric bill savings that result from the program. Direct spending activities by CPS Energy and STEP participants included in the analysis are shown in Table 4. Administration and marketing, incentive investments, bill savings, and DR payments are derived from STEP data. Participant investments were estimated using assumptions about the percent of total spending on a particular measure typically covered by an incentive, with the assumption that the participant pays the remainder.


14

Table 4. Economic Analysis Inputs, FY 2009-FY 2019 ($ million).9

Factors Increasing Consumer and Business Spending:

Input Category Description Net Gross

Admin & Marketing Spending by CPS to run and advertise the program. $48 $48

Incentive Investments Incentive payments from CPS to program participants.

$497 $497

Participant Investments Investments made by participants in the program. $842 $881

Residential Bill Savings Residential bill savings due to decreased grid electricity consumption.

$310 $338

Commercial Bill Savings Commercial bill savings due to decreased grid electricity consumption.

$282 $316

Residential DR Payments Payments made by CPS to residential participants in demand-response programs.

$48 $48

Commercial DR Payments Payments made by CPS to commercial participants in demand-response programs.

$47 $47

Factors Decreasing Consumer and Business Spending:


Program Funding Cost to residents of the Greater San Antonio Area to run STEP. Program funding was collected through increased electricity rates.

($640) ($640)

Participant Cost

Cost STEP participants to participate in the program. This is the income/revenue spent on energy efficiency upgrades that could have been spent elsewhere in the economy.

($842) ($881)

Source: CPS Energy, ICF analysis

Commercial and residential bill savings continue for the lifetimes of the products purchased during program years. To account for the impacts of these savings, effective useful life (EUL) from the Texas Technical Resource Manual (TRM) is used to estimate cumulative bill savings for each measure. The longest EUL is 30 years and, therefore, there are cumulative bill savings from FY 2020, when the last measures are installed, to FY 2048. The total bill savings from FY 2020 to FY 2048 are shown in Table 5.

Table 5. Bill Savings, FY 2020-FY 2048 ($ million).

Input Category Net Gross

Residential Bill Savings $1,099 $1,136

Commercial Bill Savings $830 $919


9 Two scenarios were considered when analyzing the impacts of STEP: a net scenario and a gross scenario. The gross scenario considered all the economic impacts supported by activity under the STEP programs, while the net scenario estimated the impacts the program has incentivized, which would not have occurred without the program.


15

Figure 16 illustrates the annual impact of STEP on local job creation during FY 2009 through FY 2019. Initially, the program’s employment impact was small, but as the program expanded and bill savings accumulated, the number of jobs supported increased. The minimal difference between the net and gross scenarios is a result of an assumed small number of free riders.

Figure 16. Annual Local Job Impacts, FY 2009-FY 2019

Source: ICF analysis

Appendix C provides a more detailed discussion of the methodology and assumptions used in this analysis.

Environmental Benefits

The energy and demand savings

from STEP have resulted in

significant environmental benefits,

including emissions reduction. As

with the savings, the cumulative

emissions reductions achieved

from STEP have climbed steadily

across the years, contributing to a

cleaner environment.

-3,000

-2,000

-1,000

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 FY2016 FY2017 FY2018 FY2019

Program spending

Participant Spending

Bill Savings

Program Funding Cost

Participant Cost

Net Jobs

Picture 4: FY 2019 Gross Emissions Reduction Equivalent Infographic


16

Figure 17. Net Cumulative STEP Emissions Reductions

Figure 17 shows the estimated cumulative emissions reductions through each year of STEP.

Figure 18: Annual Net Total STEP Emissions Reductions

Figure 18 & Table 6 provides a summary of estimated annual emissions reductions in each year

from FY 2009 to FY 2019. These emissions reductions account for all measures active in each of the

years, not just the first-year savings.

-

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

3,500,000

4,000,000

-

1,000,000

2,000,000

3,000,000

4,000,000

5,000,000

6,000,000

7,000,000


CO

2to

ns

SO2, N

OX, &

PM

2.5

lbs

SO2 (lbs) NOX (lbs) PM2.5 (lbs) CO2 (tons)

-

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

800,000

-

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

1,400,000

1,600,000


CO

2to

ns

SO2, N

OX, &

PM

2.5

lbs

SO2 (lbs) NOX (lbs) PM2.5 (lbs) CO2 (tons)


17

Table 6. Annual Net Total Emissions Reduction, FY 2009-2019

The total reduction in carbon emissions of approximately 3,366,000 (short) tons is the equivalent of taking approximately 648,000 passenger vehicles off of the road for one year, planting nearly 50.5 million trees,10 or preserving 5.3 times the total National Forest and Grasslands in Texas. Appendix D includes more details on carbon emission reduction equivalencies.

10 Calculated by entering into EPA’s greenhouse gas equivalencies calculator. For the trees, it is carbon sequestered over 10 years. https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gas-equivalencies-calculator


CO2 (tons) 44,506 85,994 137,934 187,498 240,505 282,249 325,395 322,398 428,774 577,723 732,928

NOX (lbs) 60,094 122,836 162,368 175,290 190,430 238,987 256,822 275,129 451,150 501,703 688,134

SO2 (lbs) 164,547 267,127 401,200 466,827 295,569 443,758 576,644 532,127 1,139,372 995,338 1,356,937

PM2.5 (lbs) 4,416 8,109 11,641 16,145 18,600 21,172 27,985 25,385 35,627 46,192 50,573

https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gas-equivalencies-calculator


18

II. PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

As previously noted, CPS Energy has a robust portfolio intended to provide savings opportunities for the full spectrum of customers it serves. CPS Energy has demonstrated its willingness to innovate and test new program concepts that have the potential to meet the needs of its customers and contribute to its demand goals.

Figure 19 identifies the programs with the greatest contributions to CPS Energy’s demand savings goals across all years of STEP, while Figure 21 identifies the same for energy savings. Figure 20 and Figure 22 identify the annual contributions by the top five programs for demand and energy savings, respectively. These figures are provided to help gauge the relative ranking of the different programs. The annual contribution figures, Figure 20 and Figure 22, also provide some insight into how the mix of programs shifted over the lifetime of STEP.

Figure 19. Top 15 Programs by Demand Savings


19

Figure 20. Top 5 Programs Contribution to Annual Demand Savings

Figure 21. Top 15 Programs by Energy Savings


20

Figure 22. Top 5 Programs’ Contribution to Annual Energy Savings

The flexible nature of the STEP program allows for innovation at the program level by measuring the cost-effectiveness of the portfolio as a whole, as opposed to individual programs. This framework promotes

program diversity and the pursuit of less cost-effective programs that serve unmet needs in the community.

A prime example is the Weatherization program, which is a full-service offering that provides direct installation of a host of energy saving measures for income-qualified residents, helping ensure that low to moderate income residents have affordable energy bills and safer and more comfortable living spaces.

CPS Energy has demonstrated that they are leveraging ongoing program experience to improve programs over time or end programs that have achieved their objectives or are no longer meeting expectations. This is part of the continuous improvement cycle and a mark of a maturing portfolio. For example, CPS Energy made the decision to end the window air conditioner (AC) DR program after two seasons. Given the demand for AC in the Greater San Antonio Area and the prevalence of window units, they are natural targets for a DR program. However, the program could not overcome the challenges, namely that window AC units individually have lower power usage and thus do not provide the scale of savings of centralized systems. Thus, while the program did not produce the desired results, it tested a novel concept and provided useful insights that can inform future program strategy.

The growth and innovation in CPS Energy’s STEP portfolio has drawn praise from the industry, including several awards in recent years and enhanced visibility at industry conferences and events.


21

Table 7. Industry Awards

While there have been many lessons learned during STEP implementation, two key themes have emerged. First, it will be important to continue efforts to minimize free-ridership. In some of the early programs, free-ridership was higher than might be expected based on peer energy efficiency programs. This suggests that programs were paying rebates to a higher than anticipated number of customers who would have made the energy efficiency improvements in the absence of the program. While some degree of free-ridership is often a necessary byproduct of programs that encourage participation by a large number of customers, there are strategies for reducing free-ridership. For example, CPS Energy changed certain program designs and measures offered (e.g. focusing on more efficient but costly lighting that is less likely to be installed without a rebate) and adjusted how the measures are offered, such as changing the lighting program into a midstream program in order to reach more customers that might not already know about or install more efficient options. This review finds that such adjustments were appropriate and timely.

The second theme relates to the program evaluation process. In this case, CPS Energy shifted from a one-off approach in which each year yielded variable results to a more formalized process based on the Texas Technical Reference Manuel (TRM). This change has yielded more predictable results and significantly benefited the planning process. It has also made it easier for others, such as regulators and program implementers, to review the evaluation process and provide feedback.

The following sections discuss the relative performance of individual programs, including program-level performance and rebate benchmarking.

Methodology

The performance of the programs that comprise STEP was evaluated using a range of industry-accepted metrics. These include UCT ratio, net-to-gross (NTG) ratio, cost of demand saved ($/kW), and cost of energy saved ($/kWh). The UCT ratio is the avoided cost of energy and demand, divided by the direct program costs. The NTG ratio represents the proportion of customers that would not have purchased the measure or undertaken the action without the rebate provided. The cost of savings is the total program cost divided by the total demand or energy savings. Heat map versions of the data for the cost-effectiveness metrics are provided in Appendix E to allow for easy identification of high and low values.

INDUSTRY AWARDS

2019 - Alliance to Save Energy - Chairman’s Award – STEP Program

2019 - Smart Energy Provider – APPA – STEP Program

2018 - Energy Innovator Award - APPA Demonstration of Energy & Efficiency Developments (DEED) – STEP Program

2017 - POWERGRID International Project of the Year - CPS Energy DR Program

2016 - Energy Innovator Award - APPA Demonstration of Energy & Efficiency Developments (DEED) – Solar Program

13th Award - Peak Load Management Load Award for Thought Leadership – Thermostat Special


22

The report ranks the programs against these individual metrics, as well as takes a view across the metrics to identify the highest and lowest performing programs. Again, as noted above, a lower ranking on any given metric does not imply that a program is “bad” or not worth continuing, but may suggest that its full benefits are not fully captured by these metrics. These cases are noted below where applicable.

Performance Highlights

CPS Energy’s STEP portfolio consists of 34 programs serving residential, commercial, and industrial customers. The programs can be categorized into three general categories: energy efficiency, DR, and solar. Across these categories, a few programs stand out as high performers based on the metrics evaluated.

The residential space conditioning programs, including the Residential HVAC program and New Home Construction program, are strong performers given that space conditioning coincides strongly with overall system demand and is a major end-use of electricity for the residential sector. Thus, programs that target reductions in AC use typically lead the pack in terms of peak demand savings, energy savings, and cost savings, since it is during peak when power market prices are highest.

Similarly, the residential and commercial DR programs also perform very well, as they target demand savings during peak periods. The C&I DR program contributes the most non-coincident peak demand savings to the overall portfolio at 96 MW in FY 2019, down from a max of 107 MW in FY 2015. The program averaged a UCT ratio of 1.9 over the FY 2012-2019 period, making it a cost-effective way to engage C&I customers in lowering peak demand.

Other programs struggled with low NTG ratios and other challenges. For example, the downstream residential and commercial lighting programs performed poorly in the NTG ratio metric. CPS Energy took corrective action, switching to a midstream model with the rebate applied at the retailer level. This helps promote more efficient options that might not have been purchased otherwise, improves visibility of the program so more individuals participate (beyond those already aware of it), and lowers program costs for rebates and rebate processing.

The metric that best speaks to cost-effectiveness is the UCT, the average of which is shown in Figure 23. The most cost-effective programs are those higher on the chart, such as Commercial New Construction and Emergency DR, while the programs farther to the right are the largest contributors to total demand savings, such as Commercial DR and Large Lighting. The size of the dot represents the total expenditure for each program. This gives a sense of the magnitude of each program, as well as its performance. The colors remain consistent with the program-types throughout the rest of the report.

In FY 2018, the Residential HVAC program provided

rebates to over 7,150 projects, resulting in 6.7 MW

of peak demand savings.

The New Home Construction program

incentivized high efficiency equipment and construction

practices in over 700 homes.


23

Figure 23. Cost-Effectiveness of Selected Programs

Energy Efficiency

The efficiency programs are most numerous and have the most varied performance across them due to the diversity of measures. DR and solar programs are more uniform in their implementation and outcomes. Due to this, a larger number of programs are discussed for the efficiency program type than for the others.

Residential Space Heating & Cooling

The Residential HVAC and New Home Construction programs performed well across all the metrics used. The programs perform well because the residential space conditioning end-use of electricity tends to coincide strongly with overall system demand and is a major end-use of electricity for the residential sector.

Commercial Efficiency

The commercial energy efficiency programs all performed well on the cost of energy saved metric. This can be attributed to scale, such that the large number of commercial customers reduced the softer program costs, such as marketing and processing customer applications. This does not result in as low a cost of demand saved because commercial energy use does not generally coincide with overall system peak demand as closely as residential energy use does.

Lighting

The downstream residential and small commercial lighting programs are the traditional rebate programs in which customers apply for a rebate on a purchase that has already occurred or the program directly installs the measure for the customer. These programs performed poorly in the


24

NTG ratio metric, which indicates that many of the participants would already have undertaken the purchase even if there had been no rebate or direct installation.

Lighting is particularly challenging since it has a very short payback period and a much lower upfront cost than other energy efficiency measures, which results in high adoption, even without a rebate. The recent performance of lighting programs has improved as the design was switched to a midstream model with the rebate applied at the retail level and invisible to the customer. This helps cuts down on program costs for rebates and rebate processing. While the NTG ratio has slipped, other performance metrics have improved, which more than makes up for the free-ridership.

Refrigerator Recycling

The Refrigerator Recycling program did not perform well in the NTG ratio metric and had higher program overhead costs. This is common for programs focused on appliance recycling since they target a very specific case, such as recycling a second operational fridge in the garage. The high NTG ratio suggests that many program participants would have recycled the refrigerator in the absence of an incentive. The program was discontinued in FY 2017.

Air Flow Performance

The air flow performance program showed a large rise in the UCT ratio starting in FY 2015. This can be attributed to the shift in evaluation method from individualized evaluation to a standardized approach using the Texas Technical Reference Manual (TRM). This resulted in an increase in the demand and energy savings for most measures offered in the program. This program also benefits from a high NTG ratio.

Weatherization

The weatherization program showed a similar increase in the UCT ratio starting in FY 2015, which can also be attributed to the shift in evaluation method. Results are more mixed, since the savings associated with some weatherization measures were reduced. The Weatherization program had another increase in the UCT ratio starting in FY 2017. This was a result of a change in program implementation: CPS Energy contracted out implementation to a third-party who has targeted higher savings opportunities for the lighting, ceiling insulation, and hot water pipe insulation measures that has resulted in higher demand savings for these.

Demand Response

All DR programs except for the window AC program performed extremely well on the cost of demand saved metric. This is the nature of well-run DR programs in general, since they almost exclusively provide demand savings. This also means the programs do not perform as strongly on other metrics, such as cost of energy saved. Since demand savings are the focus of the Greater San Antonio Area and STEP, this means that the DR programs are especially high performers.


25

Residential & Commercial DR

Auto DR

The Auto DR program showed a major trend upwards in the UCT ratio across the years of implementation. This was primarily due to a reduction in costs over time, as the program stopped adding new participants and thus stopped installing new switches, which have high upfront cost.

Window AC DR

The Window AC DR program performed below other programs on both the UTC and cost of demand saved metrics. While most DR programs and programs targeting space conditioning perform well, window AC units individually have low power usage and thus do not provide the scale of savings of centralized systems. The DR switch is also much easier to override than those on other systems while also being similar in price while providing less savings. The program was discontinued in 2016.

Solar

SolarHostSA

The SolarHostSA program performed well, with low cost of energy and demand saved, but has not had the expected performance in the UCT ratio. The conflict between these metrics is due to the values used in calculating each. The cost of savings calculations only includes program costs but the costs of the initial rebate and payment for generated electricity are all recovered through the energy rider. This is because the initial rebate and payment for the generated electricity are handled through a Power Purchase Agreement (PPA), which is not recoverable through the STEP cost recovery mechanism. With so much of the costs being recovered through a different mechanism, the cost of savings is artificially low. To properly account for these costs, they are included in the UTC ratio calculation.

Incentive Levels

One of the challenges in designing a program is setting the measure rebates. Benchmarking rebates against other utilities, including municipal and investor owned utilities in Texas and other states, is one way to gauge appropriate rebate levels. Utility selection was based on a range of criteria including climate similarity and number of customers served. Commercial rebate comparison was further refined by customer size.

Data Processing

A list of the most impactful measure categories was compiled and provided the focus for the benchmarking process. These were the residential HVAC, lighting, weatherization, and solar programs. The measure prioritization was based on the demand savings in FY 2019.

The STEP data used for benchmarking were publicly published rebate values and the FY 2019 EM&V report. Similar data was used from each of the comparison utilities when available. The final list of utilities reviewed for rebate benchmarking are:

• Texas Muni’s: Austin Energy, Denton Municipal Electric, and Garland Power & Light

• Texas IOUs: Oncor, CenterPoint, AEP Texas, Entergy TX, Xcel Energy, TNMP, & SWEPCO

• Other Muni’s: SMUD (CA), SRP (AZ), Orlando Utilities Commission (FL), City of Tallahassee (FL), Lakeland Electric (FL), and Jacksonville (FL).


26

Once the incentive levels were collected for CPS Energy and other utilities, they had to be converted into comparable units. This meant both a consistent time-horizon and level of aggregation. Where measure-level information is available, this can mean aggregating up from performance-based ($/kW, $/kWh, etc.) or size-based ($/ton, etc.) incentives to total project incentives. This is done for all utilities using an average STEP project for the measure.

Where only program-level information is available, this means converting to the appropriate performance-based measure, such as $/kW for DR programs or both $/kW and $/kWh for more balanced programs. In order for these measures to be used, the program had to be consistent between CPS Energy and the comparison utilities.

FY 2019 Incentive Comparison

The incentives offered through the FY 2019 STEP program are generally consistent with incentives offered by other peer utilities for similar programs.

However, it is instructive to note that the comparison of incentives that follows highlights a benefit and a limitation of contracting out program implementation: a) implementers are more familiar with pricing and incentive standards than an individual utility can be, and b) when programs are contracted across multiple implementation firms, information can be harder to find for potential program participants. The benefit of contracting out for program implementation is the expertise that firms can have when running programs for multiple utilities.

Additionally, while the utilities may be considered peers, there may be differences in local markets, program maturity, or utility priorities that drive differences in incentive levels. For example, Austin Energy offers the lowest rebates across a few of the evaluated measures, including solar and retail lighting, but the highest rebate for smart thermostats. Conversely, the City of Denton offers the highest rebates for solar, but the lowest for smart thermostats. This suggests that each utility is responding to its unique needs and priorities, just as CPS Energy is.

HVAC Rebates

Table 8. HVAC Rebate Level

Within the HVAC category the primary two measures were central AC heat pumps and smart thermostats. The STEP rebate for central AC/HPs fell within the range of rebates provided by other utilities, though the AC rebate does fall in the high end of the range. This was true across all unit efficiency levels.

Table 9. Smart Thermostat Rebate Level

The rebates provided for smart thermostats through STEP were significantly higher than those provided by any other utilities during part of the year. That was based on an increased rebate of $150 during sale periods while the non-sale period rebate shown above was more in line with the rebate provided by other utilities. The rebate for smart thermostats is changed throughout the year to coincide with large sale events such as Black Friday. This increase in the rebate does result in significantly increased participation in the program.

Low High

Central AC $175 $196 $208

Central HP $150 $196 $400

Incentive $/ton

Low High

Smart Thermostat $25 $85 $80

Incentive $


27

Lighting Rebates

Table 10. Lighting Rebate Levels

The review of lighting rebates included both the retail channel partners program and the CPS Energy legacy lighting program. The rebate expenditure per demand unit was consistent with the other utilities for the retail channel partners. However, the rebates provided through the legacy lighting program, which were discontinued, were significantly higher than the rebates provided by other utilities.

Weatherization & Solar Rebates

Both the weatherization and solar rebates lacked detailed breakdowns of measure rebates and were reviewed at the program-level. At the program scale, both the weatherization and solar rebates were within the range of rebates provided by other utilities.

Table 11. Weatherization Rebate Levels

Across the board, utility programs geared towards low-income customers were consistent with the design of the STEP weatherization program; measures are offered at little to no cost and in most cases are directly installed for the participant. The most generous program for low-income weatherization in the comparison group is Salt River Project in Arizona, which provides up to $6,000 per eligible household for energy-efficiency home improvements.11

Table 12. Solar Rebate Levels

The solar rebate for commercial customers in particular was on par with the rebate design and level from other utilities. The residential solar rebate approach from STEP, a single value lump sum of $2,500 for any project, is a very different design than other utilities, but on average results in a similar rebate payment to participants. Depending on the scale of the project and any special installation costs, the solar rebate from STEP may be slightly more or less than other rebate designs, such as a rebate based on $/(k)W or a performance of project cost.

11 https://www.srpnet.com/community/liprograms.aspx

Low High

Retail Partners $175 $258 $366

Legacy Lighting $240 $576 $420

Program $/kW

Low High

General $0.20 $0.35 $0.55

Low-Income $2,000 $5,000 $6,000

Incentive $/home

Incentive $/ft2

Low High

Commercial $0.60 $0.63 $0.90

Residential $2,000 $2,500 $4,800

Incentive $/W

https://www.srpnet.com/community/liprograms.aspx


28

III. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

The San Antonio City Council created STEP in 2009 in support of its environmental and economic

goals.12 The ordinance requires CPS Energy to save 771 MW of demand by 2020 at a cost of no more than $849 million.

Annual kW savings are verified by an independent third party and reported annually to City Council, along with program expenditure by customer class and program type. Cost recovery is based on the verified savings.

In practice, this means that the recovery of costs for STEP occurs based on a review of performance in the year after costs are incurred. This begins by determining the expenditures eligible for recovery through fuel adjustment as well as considering any over- or under-recovery from the previous year. Based on this, CPS Energy calculates an annual kWh charge. This charge is reviewed and approved by City of San Antonio staff before it is implemented. STEP does not provide for any additional incentive payment to CPS Energy over and above the recovery of program costs.

This review concludes that the information required by the ordinance has been provided consistently by CPS Energy, with the caveat that expenditure was not provided by customer class or program type until FY 2014.

The Office of Sustainability, acting pursuant to the ordinance, created additional reporting requirements that address other City priorities. These reporting and accountability requirements for STEP, to be filed quarterly by CPS Energy, include:

• Demand and energy savings by customer class and program type

• Dollar allocation by program area

• Map of allocation of rebates by Council district and income level

• Allocation of rebates by business size

• Number of firms employed

• Number of first-time and repeat participants

• Emissions reductions

• Including ozone, CO2, NOX, VOC

This review finds that all but two of these can be found in the annual or quarterly reports filed with the Office of Sustainability and available publicly. Only the number of first-time and repeat participants is missing from the reporting. One other requirement, the allocation of rebates by business size, is only partially addressed by the fact that there is a separate small business program. This level of detail may be less than was anticipated by the Office of Sustainability but is consistent with the information provided in annual reporting by other utilities outside of the Greater San Antonio Area.

Section 4 of the STEP ordinance requires CPS Energy to “reassess the STEP program in 2019 to determine if continuing the program beyond 2020 is a viable option based on projected annual reductions in energy consumption going forward and the costs that would be incurred to achieve such reductions.”13 This report was commissioned pursuant to that directive.

Reporting Adjustments

The reporting requirements seek to ensure that interested parties can track the progress of STEP and understand how well it is performing. In general, the level of detail that has been reported

12 City of San Antonio Ordinance #2009-05-21-399 13 City of San Antonio Ordinance #2009-05-21-399




29

provides enough information to track the performance of STEP, as evidenced by this report, which was compiled based primarily on publicly reported data filed with the Office of Sustainability.

Going forward, minor adjustments are suggested for the reporting of recent years and long-term tracking.

Past Years’ Reporting

As previously noted, in recent years, the STEP programs have been primarily implemented by third-party contractors or “implementers.” The reporting on expenditure breakdowns has been inconsistent due to this change. For example, some implementers’ expenses are presented together, as opposed to broken into spending categories, like administration and marketing. Due to potentially different reporting and accounting definitions between CPS Energy and the implementers, care should be taken when comparing costs between years, especially administrative expenses.

Going forward, it is recommended that program implementer expenses be broken down into the specific expense categories to aid program tracking.

Long-Term Tracking

It is instructive to note that changes in the programs and how they were reported create some challenges in assessing and comparing performance over time. For example, in the early years of STEP, the program expenditures were reported at the portfolio level. This was changed in FY 2014, with expenditures provided separately for each program.

Additionally, as STEP has evolved, both the programs and the measures offered within them have changed significantly, often as an appropriate response to changing market conditions. This makes drawing inferences about the performance of a program or end-use over time challenging. The most consistent categories over time have been the “residential” and “commercial” segments, as well as the distinction between “efficiency,” “demand response,” and “solar” programs. Within these categories, multiple programs implemented over different time frames often exist.

In order to track STEP performance in additional detail and permit comparison to end-use potential estimates, it may be helpful in the future to also report data based on categories that remain consistent across time but do not depend on the program definitions. Example categories include by end-use (e.g. lighting, HVAC, water heating, etc.) and by measure-type (e.g. CFL lighting, LED lighting, ceiling/attic insulation, central AC, central heat pumps, etc.).


30

IV. CONCLUSION

CPS Energy has made significant progress in achieving its demand reduction goals, rapidly growing the portfolio into a robust collection of programs that serve its diverse population and benefit all customers through lower electricity costs. Since the passage of STEP in 2009, CPS Energy has embraced the challenge set forth in the ordinance to save 771 MW by 2020 and is on track to achieve the goal a year early and at a cost approximately 15 percent under budget. Community engagement is a significant contributor to the portfolio’s overall success.

The focus on demand reduction sets STEP apart from many other utility programs, making direct comparison challenging in some areas, but the metrics speak for themselves. For every $1 spent on STEP programs, there is $1.93 in benefit. In aggregate, the portfolio generated a total of $553 million in net benefits, putting downward pressure on electric revenue requirements.

Additionally, the STEP program is supporting the Greater San Antonio Area’s economic growth. Between FY 2009 and FY 2019, STEP programs are estimated to have cumulatively generated 7,500 local job-years and $642 million in economy-wide benefits, including $312 million in labor income. These benefits are expected to grow over time as the bill savings persist, culminating in $3.1 billion in economic value in the Greater San Antonio Area by FY 2048.

Finally, the programs have saved an annual gross total of 1.4 TWh of electricity in FY 2019 and a cumulative total of 6.3 TWh across all years. The annual gross energy savings have resulted in carbon emission reductions of approximately 771,000 tons in FY 2019. This has the same emissions benefit as taking approximately 148,000 passenger vehicles off of the road for one year or planting nearly 11.6 million trees. Additionally, STEP has reduced SO2 emissions by 1,427,000 lbs. and NOX emissions by 724,000 lbs. Cumulatively, this comes to a net of 3,366,000 tons of CO2, 6,639,000 lbs. of SO2, and 3,123,000 lbs. of NOX emissions reduced.

These achievements provide a solid foundation for future growth and innovation. CPS Energy’s focus on demand reduction,

as opposed to energy savings, puts it ahead of the curve in the next generation of demand side management programs.

The trend is towards more dynamic management of customer load to meet system needs. In response, program portfolios are expected to evolve to include greater emphasis on distributed resources, grid optimization, non-wires alternatives, geographically targeted DSM, and other non-traditional resources. Additionally, this evolution facilitates CPS Energy’s “Flexible Path” strategy, which relies on a diversity of technologies and approaches to meet the Greater San Antonio Area’s future power needs.

While this next generation of programs will deliver enhanced benefits to the electric system, they will also expand options available to customers and further support market and economic growth. With continued community support, CPS Energy has the potential to further reduce demand and generate increased economic and environmental benefits for all residents of the Greater San Antonio Area.


31

APPENDICES

Appendix A: Program Descriptions

Residential Efficiency

Residential Lighting

The residential lighting program promotes the adoption of LED lighting. In FY 2017, CPS Energy provided LED lighting by handing out 9.5 Watt LEDs at Customer Care Fairs. The community fairs were target-marketed to the immediate area surrounding the location where CPS Energy held the event. This program was only run in FY 2010 to FY 2011 and FY 2015 to FY 2017.

Home Efficiency

The Home Efficiency program offers incentives for attic insulation, heat pump water heaters and variable-speed pool pumps. In FY 2017, CPS Energy incentivized 1,065 ceiling insulation, 6 heat pump water heaters and 318 variable-speed pool pumps. In FY 2018, CPS Energy incentivized 1,434 ceiling insulation and 442 variable-speed pool pumps. This program has run for all years of STEP.

Residential HVAC

The Residential HVAC program promotes the installation of energy efficient Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC) equipment. The program covers the installation of central air conditioners (ACs), central heat pumps (HPs), window air conditioners (WACs), and ground source heat pumps (GSHPs). In FY 2018, a total of 7,153 HVAC projects were incentivized through the CPS Energy Residential HVAC program. This program has run for all years of STEP.

Air Flow Performance

The Air Flow Performance program offers incentives to promote energy efficiency improvements of heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) distribution systems through duct leakage testing and subsequent duct repair or replacement. This program was only run through FY 2016.

New Home Construction

The new residential construction program provides incentives for new homes based on the estimated savings. The site and source energy savings are estimates based on a comparison of the predicted energy use in the as-built home to the energy use the models predict for a reference model, which incorporates the features of a home built to the reference code (IECC 2015) and equipped to relevant standards. In FY 2018, the program provided incentives for 708 new homes. This program was started in FY 2011 and continues through FY 2019.

Refrigerator Recycling

The refrigerator efficiency program incorporates two elements: (1) a rebate program to encourage the purchase of ENERGY STAR new refrigerators and; (2) a recycling program to remove older, less-efficient units. Unlike other programs to promote the purchase of energy-efficient products, energy savings from programs to incentivize the purchase of more-efficient refrigerators are not immediately realized upon the installation of the more-efficient unit. This is because older units often are kept operating as secondary units. This program ran from FY 2011 to FY 2017.

Weatherization

Residential weatherization program provides comprehensive retrofits for income-eligible customers. In FY 2018, the program provided a range of services to 3,623 customers, compared with 3,900 customers in FY 2017. Installed measures included repair, health & safety, and energy-saving measures. The energy-saving measures may be categorized as follows: LED light bulbs, wall insulation, attic insulation, floor insulation, solar screens, water heater pipe insulation, water heater


32

insulation, low-flow showerheads, air infiltration reduction, duct system improvement, and faucet aerators. This program was started in FY 2013 and continues through FY 2019.

Retail Channel Partnerships

The Residential Retail Partners program offers in-store rebates for ENERGY STAR certified lighting. There are 73 participating retailers in this program and rebates were offered for 144 different lighting products. This program was started in FY 2017 and continues through FY 2019.

AC/Duct Tune-up

The AC Duct Tune-Up program consists of technicians performing diagnostic testing on HVAC systems and implementing improvements such as duct sealing, coil cleaning, and refrigerant recharge to improve overall HVAC system performance. This program was started in FY 2018 and continues through FY 2019.

Energy Savings Through Schools

The Energy Savings Through Schools Program provides students with energy efficiency kits. The kits are comprised of three 9-Watt LED light bulbs, a high-efficiency showerhead, a kitchen faucet aerator, and a bathroom faucet aerator. 14,294 kits were distributed at 85 schools in FY 2018. The program kicked off during the middle of FY 2017. This program was started in FY 2017 and continues through FY 2019.

Home Energy Assessments

The Home Energy Assessment (HEA) Program provides energy-saving products to CPS Energy customers by means of an in-person home energy assessment or through home energy assessment direct installation kits. The HEA Program provided 18,931 installations and kits in FY 2018. This program was started in FY 2018 and continues through FY 2019.

Multi-Family

The Multifamily Energy Efficiency program provides energy efficient measures to multifamily property with more than five units. The Multifamily program includes installation of LED bulbs, high-efficiency showerheads, kitchen and bathroom faucet aerators, water heater pipe insulation, and power strips. The Multifamily program served 12,306 individual apartments in FY 2018. This program was started in FY 2017 and continues through FY 2019.

Cool Roof

The Cool Roof program is a new program for FY 2018. The installation of a highly reflective roof decreases the roofing heat transfer coefficient and reduces the solar heat transmitted to the home. Qualifying projects receive an incentive for using Energy Star-rated cool roofing materials. The rebate is calculated per square foot of roofing area located above conditioned space. This program was started in FY 2018 and continues through FY 2019.

Commercial Efficiency

Commercial Large Lighting

Commercial large lighting program includes the installation of energy-efficient lighting and lighting controls. In FY 2017, a total of 656 lighting and/or lighting controls projects were incentivized through this program. In FY 2018, legacy projects that were in queue during earlier program years for the installation of energy-efficient lighting and lighting controls and all new projects were implemented under alternate programs.

Commercial HVAC

Commercial Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC) program offers incentives to promote the installation of energy efficient HVAC equipment. The program covers the installation of split/unitary air conditioners and heat pumps (ACs/HPs), packaged terminal air conditioners and heat


33

pumps (PTACs/PTHPs), and air/water cooled water chilling packages (chillers). The program had 2 unique project sites in FY 2018 while the majority of HVAC projects were implemented under C&I Solutions. This program has run for all years of STEP.

Commercial New Construction

During the course of FY 2017, the internal review process for commercial new construction, revised in FY 2013, was continued. Customers were required to submit whole building energy models in approved software and complete sets of design documents. Each project was reviewed by the EM&V consultant, with energy models first compared to design documents to confirm accurate modeling, and then compared to ASHRAE baselines to confirm calculations of savings relative to code. This program ran from FY 2011 to FY 2017.

Commercial Custom

In FY 2017, CPS Energy offered incentives for commercial custom measures at $0.08/kWh and $200/kW. Customers were required to submit explanations for their projected savings, along with equipment information. Each project was reviewed individually, and an appropriate measurement and verification (M&V) plan was developed and provided to the customer. In FY 2018, CPS Energy processed the remaining custom projects from earlier years while new custom projects fell under the scope of the C&I Solutions. This program has run for all years of STEP.

LED Street Lights

The LED street lights program offers incentives to customers who install efficient lighting in their facilities. This program was run from FY 2013 to FY 2015.

C&I Solutions

This program includes the installation of the following commercial energy-efficiency measures: lighting, lighting controls, HVAC, HVAC tune-up, VFD, and custom. In FY 2018, a total of 458 projects were incentivized through the C&I Solutions program. This program kicked off during the middle of FY 2017 continues through FY 2019.

Schools & Institutions

Schools & Institutions program includes the installation of the following commercial energy-efficiency measures: lighting, lighting controls, HVAC, HVAC tune-up, VFD, and custom. In FY 2018, a total of 122 projects were incentivized through the Schools & Institutions program. This program was kicked off during the middle of FY 2017 and continues through FY 2019.

Small Business Solutions

Small business solutions program includes the installation of the following commercial energy-efficiency measures: lighting, lighting controls, Envelope, HVAC, HVAC tune-up, and custom. In FY 2018, a total of 223 projects were incentivized through the Small Business Solutions program. This program was kicked off during the middle of FY 2017 and continues through FY 2019.

Whole Building Optimization

The Whole Building Optimization program is a new program for FY 2018.The program consists of a toolbox of measures related to optimizing settings and conditions for the building’s HVAC equipment. These can range from changing setpoints, schedules, and static pressures in a Building Automation System (BAS) to physical changes such as coil cleaning and valve repair. A third- party company evaluated buildings to identify opportunities for optimization among the eligible options specified in Express Building Tune-up Methodology. This program began in FY 2018 and continues through FY 2019.

Residential Demand Response

Smart Thermostat


34

The Smart Thermostat direct load control program has been available to residential sector participants in single-family homes since 2003. It was expanded to include multifamily and small commercial customers in FY 2010. Through the program, Honeywell installs a programmable, controllable thermostat (PCT) at a participant’s home or place of business at no cost to the customer. In return, CPS Energy is permitted to remotely control their central air conditioning systems during DR events. Once an event is called, CPS Energy can cycle the air conditioner compressor on and off for short periods of time on event days.

Home Manager

Launched in FY 2012, Home Manager is a comprehensive electric load monitoring and direct load control program. This system controls three types of devices: HVAC units, electric water heaters, and pool pumps. When CPS Energy calls an event, all Home Manager thermostats are adjusted upward by three degrees from their pre-event set points. Water heaters and pool pumps are powered off for the duration of the event. Customers can reset their thermostat set points or drop completely out of the event at any time. The Home Manager population is shrinking as customers are being transitioned to the Nest Direct Installation (DI) program. The transition provides customers a newer technology and mobile app while also enabling CPS Energy to replace the Home Manager meter gateway with an AMI meter.

Bring Your Own Thermostat (BYOT)

BYOT is a program that integrates customers’ own thermostats with load curtailment events. The program began in FY 2015 when CPS Energy partnered with Nest Labs to implement the Rush Hour Rewards (RHR) pilot program for customers with Nest thermostats. Rush Hour Rewards uses a combination of pre-cooling in anticipation of a ‘rush hour’ – a DR event initiated by CPS Energy – and air conditioner cycling during the events to achieve load reduction. Because of Nest’s ‘learning’ capabilities, reductions may vary based on whether the home is occupied at the time of the event, or other variables.

Window AC DR

Through the ThinkEco Room Air Conditioner Pilot Program (ThinkEco Pilot), CPS Energy customers with one or more room air conditioners (RACs) are offered a free SmartAC kit from ThinkEco (valued at $139) and a participation incentive in the form of a $30 end-of-season bill credit. Each customer can receive up to 3 free SmartAC kits. In return, participants allow CPS Energy to adjust the RAC setpoints during peak summer day events. The SmartAC kit also allows consumers to remotely control the thermostat on their RAC. This remote displays a “DR” indicator during a demand response event, during which time the customer’s thermostat setpoint is raised. This program in ran in FY 2015 and FY 2016 before being shut down.

Nest Direct Install

Nest Direct Install (DI) is a new program implemented in FY 2018. Starting in early summer FY 2017, Home Manager customers were gradually migrated to the Nest DI program. CPS Energy offers these customers free Nest(s) and free installation to replace the older Home Manager Consert devices in their home. After the customer has installed a Nest, customers are automatically enrolled in the Nest RHR (Rush Hour Rewards) in synchronization with BYOT Nest customers. As with BYOT customers, at the end of each September, a $30 bill credit will also be applied to customers’ bills.

Behavioral DR (Reduce My Use)

CPS Energy partnered with Opower to implement a pilot behavioral demand response (BDR) program for residential customers beginning in the summer of FY 2017. This program was implemented as an opt- out randomized controlled trial (RCT). Participating households were all equipped with AMI meters, and did not participate in other CPS Energy DR programs. Participants received a welcome letter before the program started. One day before each Reduce My Use event,


35

participants received a notification message through email and/or a phone call. This notification also contained information explaining what a peak day is and personalized energy conservation tips.

Commercial Demand Response

CPS Energy’s Commercial DR programs are voluntary load curtailment programs for commercial and industrial customers. They are designed to reduce peak load by incentivizing customers to shed electric loads on peak summer days. The programs run from June 1st through September 30th. Participating customers commit to be available to participate in events from 1 p.m. to 7 p.m., with events typically on weekdays till 5:30 p.m. DR customers lower their energy demand for a 1 to 3 hour curtailment period. Incentives are tied to performance during this period. After each event, customers received a follow-up call and/or email with personalized customer performance feedback to participants. The Commercial DR programs consisted of Options 1, 2, and 3 of C&I DR, Emergency DR (EDR), and Automated DR (ADR). CPS Energy uses these programs differently because they have different purposes, capabilities, and contractual stipulations.

Solar Programs

Roofless Solar (Community Solar)

The Roofless Solar program presents a means for some customers who cannot or do not wish to install solar on their own property to purchase a share in a larger “community” solar installation elsewhere and see the benefits monthly on their electric bill. The community solar system became commercially operational on August 26, 2016, with 245 CPS Energy customers owning shares. CPS Energy monitors production from the community system, and offers bill credits to participating customers designed to approximate the value customers would have received had the generation occurred behind the customer’s meter, less 15% held in escrow to pay for operations and maintenance on the community solar system.

SolarHostSA

Under SolarHostSA, CPS Energy has contracted with a developer to install solar PV systems on residential and commercial rooftops within CPS Energy’s service area. Unlike typical customer-owned residential and commercial PV systems, which are interconnected on the customer’s side of the utility meter and reduce a customer’s metered demand and energy consumption, these systems inject energy directly onto the CPS Energy distribution system. CPS Energy pays the developer a contracted price for energy generated from the systems, and in addition credits host customers 3 cents/kWh generated for the use of their rooftops for this purpose. The SolarHostSA program thus works as a long-term generation contract for solar energy that is produced locally, on the distribution system. An advantage of the program design is that it enables customers who otherwise could not afford to make an investment in solar PV the opportunity to host such generators and to earn financial rewards for doing so. All installed systems are directly metered by CPS Energy.

Residential Solar PV Rebate

CPS Energy offers rebates for residential solar PV systems. The current rebate limit is $25,000 for residential projects. Rebates are also capped at 50% of project cost. The rebate for non-local installers is reduced to 75% of the local installer rebate amount, starting at $0.45 per AC watt. All residential solar PV systems are required to be installed by a CPS Energy-registered contractor. Rebates are not available for leased equipment. All systems are required to be interconnected to the CPS Energy distribution system on the customer’s side of the meter. Net metering is available to systems less than 25 kW per CPS Energy’s ES Tariff. Systems must be permitted, pass all required inspections, and comply with CPS Energy’s requirements for interconnection.

Commercial Solar PV Rebate

CPS Energy offers rebates for solar PV systems installed on commercial buildings. The current

rebate limit is $80,000 for commercial projects. Rebates are also capped at 50% of project cost. The


36

rebate for non-local installers is reduced to 75% of the local installer rebate amount, starting at $0.45

per AC watt, applicable to both residential and commercial projects. Rebates are not available for

leased equipment. All systems are required to be interconnected to the CPS Energy distribution

system on the customer’s side of the meter. Systems must be permitted, pass all required

inspections, and comply with CPS Energy’s requirements for interconnection.


37

Appendix B: Program-Level Summary Tables

This appendix contains a set of tables with the data reported for each program. Some of the data was not reported for all years but what data is available has been reported.

Net Energy Savings (kWh)

Program Net Energy Savings (kWh)


Residential Lighting 20,409,031 55,234,024 9,969,578 1,906,720 2,054,729 87,354

Home Efficiency 1,797,568 1,815,706 2,321,792 2,209,950 1,864,887 1,600,016 1,920,450 1,931,079 2,105,647 3,209,782 2,903,160

Residential HVAC 3,173,195 6,814,768 12,437,505 9,579,104 8,549,361 11,290,482 14,275,837 13,401,849 11,816,563 15,163,326 15,697,173

Air Flow Performance 441,698 505,483 405,574 394,374 461,797 858,815 889,053

New Home Construction 4,406,780 6,361,699 9,872,843 9,137,801 11,738,507 6,734,139 440,324 114,067

Refrigerator Recycling 859,811 1,175,223 1,064,287 492,521 497,482 402,432 212,893

Weatherization 2,843,308 11,603,145 12,935,654 13,758,521 15,211,611 15,261,975 13,463,844

WashRight 1,145,856 23,710

New Home Construction - Franklin 990,436 1,584,930

Retail Channel Partnerships 1,263,511 11,625,723 5,061,832

AC/Duct Tune up 151,493

Energy Savings Through Schools 1,265,003 1,734,151 1,184,254

Home Energy Assessments 1,584,885 6,510,930 2,267,904

Multi-Family 1,011,265 7,392,774 153,548

Cool Roof 12,780 31,348

Residential Efficiency Total 25,379,794 64,306,196 31,646,805 19,755,260 24,589,060 34,585,762 44,133,465 39,171,802 34,999,056 62,167,437 42,347,993

Large Lighting 41,687,581 18,478,590 16,520,883 39,672,489 57,531,863 25,501,204 28,717,624 47,723,649 116,062,320 55,666,401

Commercial HVAC 6,977,605 4,830,881 6,142,509 4,108,763 6,849,717 5,747,478 9,921,735 10,580,739 10,428,666 184,406

Commercial New Construction 58,636 - 3,420,560 5,001,811 20,547,891 3,353,474 8,016,167

Commercial Custom 225,337 823,731 900,893 6,140,233 7,072,068 2,343,510 4,001,682 7,678,459 20,881

LED Street Lights 3,048,190 7,714,442 7,490,446 1,309,113

Motors 1,798 179,793

Window Film 144,700

Roof Coating 262,354 191,366 181,405 93,572 61,939

Restaurant Equipment 19,969 1,872


38

Program Net Energy Savings (kWh)


Lean Clean Energy 595,441 384,495

Commercial Solutions 1,536,628 39,267,943 44,870,338

Schools & Institutions - 12,082,465 9,748,345

Small Business Solutions 324,767 8,773,980 27,988,174

Whole Building Optimization - 3,008,363 14,185,675

Commercial Efficiency Total 48,927,540 23,727,972 24,667,067 45,162,084 77,052,502 51,037,003 69,021,206 65,659,544 144,047,007 119,004,439 98,101,645

Efficiency Total 74,307,334 88,034,168 56,313,872 64,917,344 101,641,562 85,622,765 113,154,671 104,831,346 179,046,063 181,171,876 140,449,638

Smart Thermostat 153,154 735,677 460,676 1,870,517 995,279 1,028,788 931,047 1,002,740 740,707 1,112,260 918,788

Home Manager 89,365 181,394 325,611 728,387 504,961 453,946 49,284

Bring Your Own Thermostat 15,569 28,187 3,653,236 6,071,376 9,072,235

Window AC DR 2,426 1,152

Nest Direct Install 2,355,640 7,632,510

Behavioral DR 25,111 564,638

Residential DR Total 153,154 735,677 460,676 1,870,517 1,084,644 1,210,182 1,274,653 1,760,466 4,898,904 10,018,333

Emergency DR 4,476 19,833

Commercial DR 615,439 1,283,346 2,030,450 2,795,334 2,430,507 1,749,042 2,168,927 2,625,434 3,143,263 2,658,296

Auto DR 20,237 81,251 149,111 272,075 122,441

Commercial DR Total - 615,439 1,283,346 2,030,450 2,795,334 2,430,507 1,773,755 2,270,011 2,774,545 3,415,338 2,780,737

DR Total 153,154 1,351,116 1,744,022 3,900,967 3,879,978 3,640,689 3,048,408 4,030,477 7,673,449 13,433,671 21,018,192

Community Solar - 2,159,271

Solar Host SA - 1,984,985 5,582,045 1,131,040

Solar Initiative 145,223 327,694 1,729,383 2,342,898 3,393,361 5,292,733 7,018,005 10,000,580 47,800,667 36,054,456 41,991,569

Residential Solar Total 145,223 327,694 1,729,383 2,342,898 3,393,361 5,292,733 7,018,005 10,000,580 51,944,923 41,636,501 43,122,609

Solar PV 2,498,757 3,520,372 3,683,857 3,524,325 2,929,448 3,638,996 7,010,621 14,799,189

Commercial Solar Total - - - 2,498,757 3,520,372 3,683,857 3,524,325 2,929,448 3,638,996 7,010,621 14,799,189

Solar Total 145,223 327,694 1,729,383 4,841,655 6,913,733 8,976,590 10,542,330 12,930,028 55,583,919 48,647,122 57,921,798

STEP Total 74,605,711 89,712,978 59,787,277 73,659,966 112,435,273 98,240,044 126,745,409 121,791,851 242,303,431 243,252,669 219,389,628


39

Net Peak Demand Savings (kW)

Program Net Peak Demand Savings (kW)


Residential Lighting 2,083 5,186 993 59 65 9

Home Efficiency 515 737 944 384 247 209 549 505 964 1,336 1,018

Residential HVAC 964 2,078 3,634 2,885 2,557 3,279 4,368 6,648 5,140 6,430 6,826

Air Flow Performance 219 281 192 243 265 392 386

New Home Construction 745 1,445 1,924 1,969 2,490 1,304 256 66

Refrigerator Recycling 91 108 98 45 66 57 28

Weatherization 951 3,674 3,198 3,843 7,279 6,552 5,516

WashRight 478 10

New Home Construction - Franklin 577 967

Retail Channel Partnerships 127 1,168 508

AC/Duct Tune up 54

Energy Savings Through Schools 100 106 71

Home Energy Assessments 142 604 216

Multi-Family 85 784 16

Cool Roof 5 27

Residential Efficiency Total 3,562 8,220 7,166 5,024 6,020 9,441 11,122 12,808 14,130 17,682 15,165

Large Lighting 7,099 4,151 3,223 6,905 9,847 5,934 3,704 7,194 19,240 7,326

Commercial HVAC 2,001 2,163 2,537 1,361 4,360 4,230 4,089 3,541 2,715 35

Commercial New Construction 42 - 643 861 2,946 1,282 1,159

Commercial Custom 4 115 27 634 318 635 87 391 74

LED Street Lights - - - 25

Motors 1 62

Window Film 42

Roof Coating 85 131 123 10 8

Restaurant Equipment 2 -

Lean Clean Energy 68 18

Commercial Solutions 337 7,235 7,467

Schools & Institutions - 2,012 3,372

Small Business Solutions 13 1,400 5,199


40

Program Net Peak Demand Savings (kW)


Whole Building Optimization - 414 1,946

Commercial Efficiency Total 9,185 6,450 6,214 8,321 15,492 11,343 11,374 12,104 23,855 18,496 18,009

Efficiency Total 12,747 14,670 13,380 13,345 21,512 20,784 22,496 24,912 37,985 36,178 33,174

Smart Thermostat 3,173 13,048 17,785 25,764 30,836 36,688 39,851 43,103 34,757 32,179 37,457

Home Manager 14,461 24,115 34,058 45,593 40,170 20,682 2,182

Bring Your Own Thermostat 1,412 3,268 10,928 20,832 32,895

Window AC DR 128 204

Nest Direct Install 6,457 22,911


Residential DR Total 3,173 13,048 17,785 25,764 45,297 60,803 75,449 92,168 85,855 92,705 103,062


Commercial DR 16,884 45,028 68,562 63,969 66,802 82,050 105,550 81,507 71,574 79,216

Auto DR 1,868 4,576 6,189 7,881 3,987

Commercial DR Total - 16,884 45,028 68,562 63,969 66,802 88,394 129,959 87,696 79,455 83,203

DR Total 3,173 29,932 62,813 94,326 109,266 127,605 163,843 222,127 173,551 172,160 186,265

Community Solar - 576 -

Solar Host SA - 571 1,626 340

Solar Initiative 105 176 1,090 1,461 1,760 2,747 2,476 2,893 13,741 10,365 12,072

Residential Solar Total 105 176 1,090 1,461 1,760 2,747 2,476 2,893 14,888 11,991 12,412

Solar PV 1,636 2,011 2,110 1,281 887 1,094 2,108 4,450

Commercial Solar Total - - - 1,636 2,011 2,110 1,281 887 1,094 2,108 4,450

Solar Total 105 176 1,090 3,097 3,771 4,857 3,757 3,780 15,982 14,099 16,862

STEP Total 16,025 44,778 77,283 110,768 134,549 153,246 190,096 250,819 227,518 222,437 236,301


41

Net Non-Coincident Demand Savings (kW)

Program Net Non-Coincident Demand Savings (kW)


Residential Lighting 23,896 61,157 11,673 4,556 4,814 43

Home Efficiency 739 801 1,031 671 560 479 736 930 2,012 2,606 2,283

Residential HVAC 1,205 2,597 4,543 3,606 3,197 4,099 5,836 7,384 5,277 6,573 6,901

Air Flow Performance 274 281 192 243 265 525 399

New Home Construction 1,544 2,978 1,924 1,969 2,490 1,509 379 101

Refrigerator Recycling 114 135 122 57 70 57 32

Weatherization 1,415 5,969 13,365 13,337 15,661 15,775 15,749

WashRight 1,949 40

New Home Construction - Franklin 816 1,362

Retail Channel Partnerships 628 5,786 2,515

AC/Duct Tune up 69

Energy Savings Through Schools 383 608 412

Home Energy Assessments 627 2,825 1,058

Multi-Family 341 2,638 73

Cool Roof 6 55

Residential Efficiency Total 25,840 64,829 21,135 7,622 7,461 12,838 27,578 28,430 25,383 37,803 30,408

Large Lighting 8,077 4,757 3,693 7,745 11,097 6,406 6,564 11,901 21,230 9,125

Commercial HVAC 2,533 2,855 3,295 1,648 6,009 5,386 5,009 3,753 2,856 39

Commercial New Construction 51 - 643 861 2,946 1,299 1,183

Commercial Custom 4 116 35 634 318 638 647 513 70

LED Street Lights 716 1,761 1,880 316

Motors 6 1 62

Window Film 54

Roof Coating 94 157 155 13 9

Restaurant Equipment 3 -

Lean Clean Energy 78 21

Commercial Solutions 390 10,368 10,921

Schools & Institutions - 3,623 3,919

Small Business Solutions 82 2,137 6,808


42

Program Net Non-Coincident Demand Savings (kW)


Whole Building Optimization - 400 2,009

Commercial Efficiency Total 10,710 7,774 7,507 9,462 19,108 14,732 17,037 17,600 26,254 25,763 23,973

Efficiency Total 36,550 72,603 28,642 17,084 26,569 27,570 44,615 46,030 51,637 63,565 54,381

Smart Thermostat 3,173 13,048 17,785 25,764 30,836 36,688 39,851 47,266 43,863 44,157 43,632

Home Manager 14,461 24,115 34,058 49,158 45,703 24,539 3,351

Bring Your Own Thermostat 1,412 3,845 13,197 24,241 37,539

Window AC DR 128 256

Nest Direct Install 7,347 26,732


Residential DR Total 3,173 13,048 17,785 25,764 45,297 60,803 75,449 100,525 102,763 112,839 123,581


Commercial DR 16,884 45,028 68,562 63,969 66,802 82,050 106,639 97,039 89,823 96,152

Auto DR 1,868 5,172 7,290 9,703 5,835

Commercial DR Total - 16,884 45,028 68,562 63,969 66,802 88,394 131,644 104,329 99,526 101,987

DR Total 3,173 29,932 62,813 94,326 109,266 127,605 163,843 232,169 207,092 212,365 225,568

Community Solar - 1,133

Solar Host SA - 1,176 3,311 673

Solar Initiative 105 176 1,090 1,461 1,760 2,747 4,144 5,735 28,328 21,367 24,885

Residential Solar Total 105 176 1,090 1,461 1,760 2,747 4,144 5,735 30,637 24,678 25,558

Solar PV 1,636 2,011 2,110 2,044 1,685 2,164 4,169 8,801

Commercial Solar Total - - - 1,636 2,011 2,110 2,044 1,685 2,164 4,169 8,801

Solar Total 105 176 1,090 3,097 3,771 4,857 6,188 7,420 32,801 28,847 34,359

Savings Decay - - - - - (23,896) (61,157) (11,673) - - (8,077)

STEP Total 39,828 102,711 92,545 114,507 139,606 136,136 153,489 273,946 291,530 304,777 306,231


43

Net-To-Gross (NTG) Ratios

Program NTG Ratio


Residential Lighting 0.80 0.80 0.85 0.85 0.85

Home Efficiency 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93

Residential HVAC 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95

Air Flow Performance 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90

New Home Construction 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Refrigerator Recycling 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.63

Weatherization 0.93 0.93 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

WashRight 0.93 0.93

New Home Construction - Franklin 1.00 1.00

Retail Channel Partnerships 0.77 0.77 0.77

AC/Duct Tune up 0.95

Energy Savings Through Schools 0.95 0.95 0.95

Home Energy Assessments 0.84 0.84 0.84

Multi-Family 0.92 0.92 0.92

Cool Roof 1.00 1.00

Residential Efficiency Total 0.86 0.89 0.93 0.94 0.95 0.96 0.96 0.95 0.91 0.93

Large Lighting 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.96

Commercial HVAC 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96

Commercial New Construction 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.92 1.00

Commercial Custom 0.92 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.92 1.00 0.96

LED Street Lights 0.90 0.90 0.85 0.96

Motors 0.90 0.94

Window Film 0.89

Roof Coating 0.89 0.90 0.90 0.90

Restaurant Equipment 0.94 0.94

Lean Clean Energy 0.91 0.91

Commercial Solutions 0.85 0.96 0.96

Schools & Institutions 1.00 0.96 0.96

Small Business Solutions 0.85 0.95 0.85


44

Program NTG Ratio


Whole Building Optimization 1.00 0.96 0.96

Commercial Efficiency Total 0.86 0.88 0.86 0.87 0.90 0.91 0.87 0.87 0.96 0.93

Efficiency Total 0.86 0.89 0.88 0.89 0.92 0.93 0.90 0.89 0.94 0.93

Smart Thermostat 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Home Manager 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Bring Your Own Thermostat 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Window AC DR 1.00 1.00

Nest Direct Install 1.00 1.00

Behavioral DR 1.00 1.00

Residential DR Total 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Emergency DR 1.00 1.00

Commercial DR 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Auto DR 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Commercial DR Total 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

DR Total 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Community Solar 1.00 1.00

Solar Host SA 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Solar Initiative 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Residential Solar Total 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Solar PV 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Commercial Solar Total - - 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Solar Total 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

STEP Total 0.84 0.89 0.89 0.90 0.93 0.94 0.92 0.91 0.95 0.95


45

Cost Effectiveness: Utility Cost Test (UCT) ratio

Program

Cost Effectiveness

Program Administrator Cost (UCT) Test Ratio

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019 Avg

Residential Lighting 1.1 0.9 0.8 1.0

Home Efficiency 1.5 0.9 0.8 1.7 1.7 3.6 2.8 3.0 2.0

Residential HVAC 2.5 2.1 2.3 3.3 4.4 2.9 3.8 4.2 3.2

Air Flow Performance 0.5 0.4 0.4 1.0 1.2 0.7

New Home Construction 3.5 2.8 2.5 6.0 5.1 1.5 1.5 3.8

Refrigerator Recycling 3.5 1.9 1.2 1.5 1.1 1.0 1.9

Weatherization 0.3 0.3 0.6 0.5 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.7

WashRight 0.8 0.8

New Home Construction - Franklin 1.3 1.5 1.4

Retail Channel Partnerships 2.4 2.4 2.7 2.5

AC/Duct Tune up 1.0 1.0

Energy Savings Through Schools 0.9 1.1 1.4 1.1

Home Energy Assessments 0.8 0.8 0.9 0.8

Multi-Family 1.2 2.0 0.8 1.8

Cool Roof 0.4 2.8 1.5

Residential Efficiency Total 2.4 1.2 0.8 1.5 1.3 1.3 1.5 1.5 1.4

Large Lighting 2.5 1.9 2.1 2.9 3.3 3.3 3.3 2.8

Commercial HVAC 1.7 1.9 2.1 3.5 4 2.4 1.0 2.6

Commercial New Construction - 2.4 2.8 6.7 8.8 4.6 5.2

Commercial Custom 6.7 3.7 3.3 3.7 3.5 2.8 9.2 3.3

LED Street Lights 0.4 NA* 2.9 1.3 1.1

Motors

Window Film

Roof Coating 1.1 0.6 0.9

Restaurant Equipment 3.3 3.3

Lean Clean Energy 54.4 54.4

Commercial Solutions 1.0 3.5 3.6 3.3

Schools & Institutions - 2.2 2.2 2.2


46

Program

Cost Effectiveness

Program Administrator Cost (UCT) Test Ratio

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019 Avg

Small Business Solutions 0.3 3.0 4.2 3.5

Whole Building Optimization - 0.6 0.9 0.8

Commercial Efficiency Total 2.4 1.8 2.2 3.8 3.7 3.0 3.1 3.1 3.0

Efficiency Total 2.4 1.5 1.2 2.2 1.9 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.0

Smart Thermostat 1.7 5.5 4.7 0.5 1.1 1.7 3.1 3.6 2.5

Home Manager 1.0 1.8 1.0 1.7 1.5 - - 1.2

Bring Your Own Thermostat 1.5 1.9 3.1 5.1 5.7 4.2

Window AC DR 0.1 0.2 0.1

Nest Direct Install 2.9 3.2 3.1

Behavioral DR 2.9 2.5 2.7

Residential DR Total 2.9 0.8 1.4 1.8 2.8 3.5 2.1

Emergency DR 2.8 4.8 4.4

Commercial DR 1.1 0.9 0.9 1.5 2.8 2.5 2.3 2.3 1.8

Auto DR 0.4 0.5 1.5 4.4 3.1 1.3

Commercial DR Total 1.1 0.9 0.9 1.3 2.4 2.3 2.5 2.3 1.8

DR Total 1.4 1.9 2.4 1.0 1.8 2.0 2.7 3.1 2.0

Community Solar - 0.8 0.8

Solar Host SA - 0.5 0.9 1.0 0.5

Solar Initiative 0.8 0.6 0.8 1.1 1.2 1.5 2.7 3.3 1.8

Residential Solar Total 0.8 1.1 1.1 1.4 2.7 3.3 1.8

Solar PV 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.3 1.4 1.3 2.3 6.5 1.7

Commercial Solar Total 0.9 1.3 1.4 1.3 2.3 6.5 1.7

Solar Total 0.8 0.7 0.9 1.2 1.2 1.4 2.6 3.8 1.8

STEP Total 1.8 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.8 1.9 2.3 2.7 1.9


47

Cost of Lifetime Energy Savings

Program Cost of Lifetime Energy Savings

FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019 Avg

Residential Lighting $0.00 $0.00 $0.01 $0.03 $0.03 $0.04 $0.01

Home Efficiency $0.03 $0.02 $0.02 $0.03 $0.03 $0.03 $0.03 $0.03 $0.02 $0.02 $0.02 $0.02

Residential HVAC $0.02 $0.02 $0.02 $0.02 $0.02 $0.02 $0.02 $0.02 $0.02 $0.02 $0.02 $0.02

Air Flow Performance $0.05 $0.05 $0.07 $0.09 $0.09 $0.05 $0.05 $0.06

New Home Construction $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.05 $0.05 $0.01

Refrigerator Recycling $0.02 $0.02 $0.03 $0.04 $0.03 $0.04 $0.04 $0.03

Weatherization $0.10 $0.07 $0.06 $0.08 $0.07 $0.06 $0.07 $0.07

WashRight $0.04 $0.04 $0.05

New Home Construction - Franklin $0.06 $0.06 $0.06

Retail Channel Partnerships $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01

AC/Duct Tune up $0.07 $0.07

Energy Savings Through Schools $0.04 $0.03 $0.02 $0.03

Home Energy Assessments $0.04 $0.04 $0.04 $0.04

Multi-Family $0.02 $0.01 $0.04 $0.02

Cool Roof $0.15 $0.05 $0.08

Residential Efficiency Total $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.02 $0.03 $0.04 $0.03 $0.04 $0.04 $0.03 $0.04 $0.03

Large Lighting $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01

Commercial HVAC $0.01 $0.02 $0.02 $0.03 $0.03 $0.03 $0.02 $0.02 $0.02 $0.05 $0.02

Commercial New Construction $0.02 $0.01 $0.01 $0.00 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01

Commercial Custom $0.05 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.05 $0.01

LED Street Lights $0.04 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01

Motors $0.01 $0.01

Window Film $0.06 $0.06

Roof Coating $0.04 $0.00 $0.05 $0.04 $0.02

Restaurant Equipment $0.01 $0.01

Lean Clean Energy $0.01 $0.00

Commercial Solutions $0.04 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01

Schools & Institutions $0.01 $0.02 $0.02

Small Business Solutions $0.11 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01


48

Program Cost of Lifetime Energy Savings


Whole Building Optimization $0.07 $0.05 $0.05

Commercial Efficiency Total $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01

Efficiency Total $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.02 $0.01 $0.02 $0.02 $0.02 $0.02 $0.02

Smart Thermostat $12.57 $6.40 $16.01 $4.98 $4.17 $5.74 $7.16 $5.12 $5.58 $2.38 $3.46 $5.54

Home Manager $130.46 $54.99 $29.35 $4.84 $7.00 $3.86 $12.48 $17.41

Bring Your Own Thermostat $18.71 $22.41 $0.30 $0.25 $0.18 $0.27

Window AC DR $173.27 $280.71 $207.87

Nest Direct Install $1.18 $0.52 $0.68

Behavioral DR $18.39 $0.76 $1.51

Residential DR Total $12.57 $6.40 $16.01 $5.17 $14.57 $13.12 $13.28 $5.46 $1.79 $0.91 $0.54 $2.63

Emergency DR $26.61 $24.27 $24.70

Commercial DR $1.59 $2.35 $2.48 $1.67 $2.05 $3.41 $2.40 $1.85 $1.35 $1.92 $2.05

Auto DR $49.25 $22.34 $8.98 $2.42 $1.79 $7.79

Commercial DR Total $ - $1.59 $2.35 $2.48 $1.67 $2.05 $3.99 $3.30 $2.24 $1.44 $1.91 $2.24

DR Total $12.57 $4.21 $5.96 $3.45 $5.18 $5.73 $7.88 $4.25 $1.95 $1.05 $0.72 $2.50

Community Solar $0.02 $0.02

Solar Host SA $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Solar Initiative $0.06 $0.07 $0.07 $0.05 $0.04 $0.04 $0.03 $0.03 $0.03 $0.01 $0.01 $0.02

Residential Solar Total $0.06 $0.07 $0.07 $0.05 $0.04 $0.04 $0.03 $0.03 $0.02 $0.01 $0.01 $0.02

Solar PV $0.05 $0.05 $0.04 $0.03 $0.03 $0.03 $0.02 $0.01 $0.02

Commercial Solar Total $ - $ - $ - $0.05 $0.05 $0.04 $0.03 $0.03 $0.03 $0.02 $0.01 $0.02

Solar Total $0.06 $0.07 $0.07 $0.05 $0.04 $0.04 $0.03 $0.03 $0.03 $0.01 $0.01 $0.02

STEP Total $0.01 $0.01 $0.03 $0.03 $0.03 $0.03 $0.03 $0.03 $0.02 $0.02 $0.02 $0.02


49

Cost of Lifetime Demand Savings

Program Cost of Lifetime Demand Savings


Residential Lighting $33 $50 $54 $912 $860 $373 $59

Home Efficiency $91 $52 $47 $148 $192 $229 $92 $99 $39 $56 $58 $75

Residential HVAC $64 $67 $78 $78 $73 $70 $50 $35 $48 $41 $36 $52

Air Flow Performance $93 $95 $144 $141 $156 $104 $108 $118

New Home Construction $36 $35 $35 $36 $33 $40 $82 $88 $37

Refrigerator Recycling $174 $241 $299 $463 $263 $305 $330 $276

Weatherization $305 $232 $251 $302 $147 $150 $178 $198

WashRight $143 $100 $98 $100

New Home Construction - Franklin $102 $91 $95

Retail Channel Partnerships $129 $134 $121 $130

AC/Duct Tune up $190 $190

Energy Savings Through Schools $464 $422 $350 $419

Home Energy Assessments $419 $454 $400 $437

Multi-Family $252 $138 $412 $154

Cool Roof $378 $53 $104

Residential Efficiency Total $49 $67 $72 $103 $130 $112 $128 $109 $112 $105 $103

Large Lighting $31 $37 $45 $57 $56 $42 $52 $55 $49 $62 $50

Commercial HVAC $42 $47 $94 $42 $36 $42 $51 $89 $273 $51

Commercial New Construction $23 $44 $40 $29 $14 $41 $31

Commercial Custom $2,898 $47 $258 $62 $145 $34 $281 $108 $14 $87

LED Street Lights $727 $727

Motors $15 $15

Window Film $199 $199

Roof Coating $121 $6 $463 $339 $51

Restaurant Equipment $60 $60

Lean Clean Energy $64 $51

Commercial Solutions $192 $57 $65 $64

Schools & Institutions $89 $64 $74

Small Business Solutions $2,641 $92 $53 $66


50

Program Cost of Lifetime Demand Savings


Whole Building Optimization $535 $335 $370

Commercial Efficiency Total $35 $43 $46 $63 $60 $42 $46 $50 $57 $67 $70 $55

Efficiency Total $38 $51 $57 $66 $72 $82 $78 $89 $76 $90 $89 $76

Smart Thermostat $607 $361 $415 $361 $134 $161 $167 $119 $119 $82 $85 $175

Home Manager $806 $414 $281 $77 $88 $85 $282 $224

Bring Your Own Thermostat $206 $193 $99 $72 $50 $74

Window AC DR $3,284 $1,585 $2,240

Nest Direct Install $431 $175 $231

Behavioral DR $37 $57 $44

Residential DR Total $607 $361 $415 $375 $349 $261 $224 $104 $102 $99 $96 $178

Emergency DR $27 $24 $25

Commercial DR $58 $67 $73 $73 $75 $73 $49 $60 $59 $64 $65

Auto DR $534 $397 $216 $83 $55 $205

Commercial DR Total $ - $58 $67 $73 $73 $75 $80 $58 $71 $62 $64 $68

DR Total $607 $190 $166 $156 $187 $164 $147 $77 $86 $82 $82 $118

Community Solar $82 $82

Solar Host SA $7 $10 $ - $8

Solar Initiative $77 $127 $110 $80 $80 $79 $94 $114 $89 $51 $44 $71

Residential Solar Total $77 $127 $110 $80 $80 $79 $94 $121 $87 $47 $43 $69

Solar PV $80 $80 $67 $80 $93 $99 $58 $21 $61

Commercial Solar Total $ - $ - $ - $80 $80 $67 $80 $93 $99 $58 $21 $61

Solar Total $77 $127 $110 $80 $80 $73 $89 $114 $88 $49 $37 $67

STEP Total $46 $65 $82 $88 $93 $96 $96 $89 $81 $75 $66 $83


51

Implementation and Incentive Expenditure ($)

Program Implementation and Incentive Expenditure ($)

FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019

Residential Lighting $ 1,000,000 $ 1,050,040 $ 63,647

Home Efficiency $ 745,558 $ 844,194 $ 878,975 $ 677,978 $ 1,362,019 $ 1,059,219

Residential HVAC $ 3,424,560 $ 3,403,050 $ 3,706,733 $ 4,070,510 $ 4,260,826 $ 3,949,136

Air Flow Performance $ 709,169 $ 750,280 $ 789,090

New Home Construction $ 1,455,100 $ 1,777,100 $ 1,144,500 $ 468,832 $ 131,300

Refrigerator Recycling $ 56,055 $ 53,740 $ 45,155 $ 56,570

Weatherization $ 14,256,958 $ 13,382,366 $ 18,881,535 $ 18,005,102 $ 16,969,245 $ 16,566,801

WashRight

New Home Construction - Franklin $ 1,326,225 $ 1,952,173

Retail Channel Partnerships $ 321,825 $ 3,063,740 $ 1,194,821

AC/Duct Tune up $ 100,337

Energy Savings Through Schools $ 547,602 $ 523,495 $ 289,987

Home Energy Assessments $ 944,227 $ 4,324,332 $ 1,338,810

Multi-Family $ 352,793 $ 1,767,084 $ 105,499

Cool Roof $ 8,458 $ 15,109

Residential Efficiency Total $ 20,647,400 $ 21,210,730 $ 26,496,028 $ 25,509,086 $ 33,837,061 $ 26,471,555

Large Lighting $ 4,374,086 $ 3,511,901 $ 7,438,476 $ 18,192,066 $ 8,835,129

Commercial HVAC $ 2,246,077 $ 2,660,635 $ 2,851,072 $ 3,894,956 $ 153,275

Commercial New Construction $ 679,396 $ 1,799,501 $ 390,573 $ 1,061,486

Commercial Custom $ 655,629 $ 315,052 $ 368,510 $ 664,742 $ 15,445

LED Street Lights $ 916,012 $ 350,679

Motors

Window Film

Roof Coating

Restaurant Equipment

Lean Clean Energy

Commercial Solutions $ 923,734 $ 5,769,623 $ 6,713,486

Schools & Institutions $ 628,549 $ 2,468,233 $ 2,966,322

Small Business Solutions $ 411,674 $ 1,529,714 $ 3,206,468


52

Program Implementation and Incentive Expenditure ($)

FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019

Whole Building Optimization $ 155,089 $ 644,884 $ 1,877,322

Commercial Efficiency Total $ 7,955,188 $ 9,203,101 $ 11,048,631 $ 25,932,296 $ 19,416,303 $ 15,114,277

Efficiency Total $ 28,602,588 $ 30,413,831 $ 37,544,659 $ 51,441,382 $ 53,253,364 $ 41,585,832

Smart Thermostat $ 5,855,338 $ 6,176,118 $ 4,903,769 $ 3,966,166 $ 2,565,728 $ 3,077,518

Home Manager $ 7,414,497 $ 7,615,747 $ 3,150,298 $ 3,340,585 $ 1,590,347 $ 560,775

Bring Your Own Thermostat $ 202,249 $ 441,454 $ 963,456 $ 1,465,579 $ 1,572,783

Window AC DR $ 337,538 $ 301,831

Nest Direct Install $ 2,723,900 $ 3,890,848

Behavioral DR $ 450,000 $ 419,000

Residential DR Total $ 13,269,835 $ 14,331,652 $ 8,797,352 $ 8,270,207 $ 8,795,554 $ 9,520,924

Emergency DR $ 109,148 $ 456,084

Commercial DR $ 4,894,008 $ 5,463,450 $ 4,928,551 $ 4,700,074 $ 4,119,614 $ 4,910,195

Auto DR $ 913,358 $ 1,720,079 $ 1,286,639 $ 637,961 $ 212,435

Commercial DR Total $ 4,894,008 $ 6,485,956 $ 7,104,714 $ 5,986,713 $ 4,757,575 $ 5,122,630

DR Total $ 18,163,843 $ 20,817,608 $ 15,902,066 $ 14,256,920 $ 13,553,129 $ 14,643,554

Community Solar $ - $ 1,289,375

Solar Host SA $ 222,489 $ - $ - $ -

Solar Initiative $ 5,739,276 $ 6,482,046 $ 9,315,955 $ 35,345,295 $ 15,274,749 $ 15,118,988

Residential Solar Total $ 5,739,276 $ 6,482,046 $ 9,538,444 $ 36,634,670 $ 15,274,749 $ 15,118,988

Solar PV $ 3,755,814 $ 2,811,929 $ 2,330,041 $ 3,125,011 $ 3,538,621 $ 2,744,191

Commercial Solar Total $ 3,755,814 $ 2,811,929 $ 2,330,041 $ 3,125,011 $ 3,538,621 $ 2,744,191

Solar Total $ 9,495,090 $ 9,293,975 $ 11,868,485 $ 39,759,681 $ 18,813,370 $ 17,863,179

STEP Total $ 56,261,521 $ 60,525,414 $ 65,315,210 $ 105,457,983 $ 85,619,863 $ 74,092,565


53

CPS Energy Admin Expenditure ($)

Program CPS Energy Admin Expenditure ($)

FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019

Residential Lighting $ 76,072 $ 67,736 $ 3,404

Home Efficiency $ 143,080 $ 98,383 $ 49,240 $ 21,245 $ 33,497 $ 38,451

Residential HVAC $ 428,144 $ 240,343 $ 154,975 $ 106,443 $ 109,291 $ 145,785


New Home Construction $ 179,915 $ 118,576 $ 54,124 $ 12,127 $ 2,836


Weatherization $ 1,726,884 $ 1,693,265 $ 2,922,249 $ 2,125,699 $1,546,895 $1,886,917

WashRight

New Home Construction - Franklin $ 32,623 $ 75,089

Retail Channel Partnerships $ 5,574 $ 74,969 $ 34,389



Home Energy Assessments $ 16,354 $ 105,732 $ 56,186

Multi-Family $ 6,110 $ 42,949 $ 4,729

Cool Roof $ 19,877 $ 6,493

Residential Efficiency Total $2,686,130 $2,361,460 $3,367,866 $2,314,612 $1,984,040 $2,256,385

Large Lighting $ 628,334 $ 355,444 $ 454,737 $ 636,929 $ 273,104

Commercial HVAC $ 331,697 $ 250,158 $ 154,384 $ 147,008 $ 7,540

Commercial New Construction $ 111,328 $ 158,362 $ 18,246 $ 30,462

Commercial Custom $ 98,234 $ 35,898 $ 31,090 $ 29,264 $ 1,676

LED Street Lights $ 92,711 $ 12,875

Motors

Window Film

Roof Coating


Lean Clean Energy

Commercial Solutions $ 17,671 $ 179,495 $ 285,382

Schools & Institutions $ 12,024 $ 74,660 $ 124,573

Small Business Solutions $ 7,875 $ 47,099 $ 129,739


54

Program CPS Energy Admin Expenditure ($)

FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019

Whole Building Optimization $ 2,967 $ 19,174 $ 76,408

Commercial Efficiency Total $1,169,593 $ 892,573 $ 658,457 $ 884,200 $ 602,748 $ 628,977

Efficiency Total $3,855,723 $3,254,033 $4,026,323 $3,198,812 $2,586,788 $2,885,362

Smart Thermostat $ 48,981 $ 487,662 $ 231,488 $ 168,578 $ 82,914 $ 102,706

Home Manager $2,559,548 $1,941,292 $ 378,080 $ 193,131 $ 160,817 $ 54,066

Bring Your Own Thermostat $ 89,057 $ 190,136 $ 118,104 $ 37,919 $ 48,300

Window AC DR $ 82,825 $ 21,548

Nest Direct Install $ 59,440 $ 115,664

Behavioral DR $ 11,825 $ 11,458

Residential DR Total $2,608,529 $2,600,836 $ 821,252 $ 479,813 $ 352,915 $ 332,194

Emergency DR $ 9,950 $ 25,274

Commercial DR $ 91,750 $ 498,042 $ 273,336 $ 167,113 $ 130,101 $ 189,998

Auto DR $ 83,261 $ 95,320 $ 52,868 $ 19,493 $ 7,183

Commercial DR Total $ 91,750 $ 591,253 $ 393,930 $ 219,981 $ 149,594 $ 197,181

DR Total $2,700,279 $3,192,089 $1,215,182 $ 699,794 $ 502,509 $ 529,375

Community Solar $ 182,719 $ 126,326 $ 18,040

Solar Host SA $ 186,974 $ 78,323 $ 337,869 $ -

Solar Initiative $ 754,636 $ 502,714 $ 575,402 $1,442,717 $ 557,176 $ 655,569

Residential Solar Total $ 754,636 $ 502,714 $ 945,095 $1,647,366 $ 895,045 $ 673,609

Solar PV $ 456,473 $ 253,561 $ 156,661 $ 128,431 $ 128,349 $ 118,987

Commercial Solar Total $ 456,473 $ 253,561 $ 156,661 $ 128,431 $ 128,349 $ 118,987

Solar Total $1,211,109 $ 756,275 $1,101,756 $1,775,797 $1,023,394 $ 792,596

STEP Total $7,767,111 $7,202,397 $6,343,261 $5,674,403 $4,112,691 $4,207,333


55

Total Program Expenditure ($)

Program Total Program Expenditure ($)

FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 20 2019

Residential Lighting $ 1,076,072 $ 1,117,776 $ 67,051

Home Efficiency $ 888,638 $ 942,578 $ 928,215 $ 699,223 $ 1,395,516 $ 1,097,670

Residential HVAC $ 3,852,704 $ 3,643,393 $ 3,861,708 $ 4,176,953 $ 4,370,118 $ 4,094,921


New Home Construction $ 1,635,015 $ 1,895,676 $ 1,198,624 $ 480,959 $ 134,136


Weatherization $ 15,983,842 $ 15,075,631 $ 21,803,784 $ 20,130,801 $ 18,516,140 $ 18,453,718

WashRight

New Home Construction - Franklin $ 1,358,848 $ 2,027,262

Retail Channel Partnerships $ 327,399 $ 3,138,709 $ 1,229,210



Home Energy Assessments $ 960,581 $ 4,430,064 $ 1,394,996

Multi-Family $ 358,903 $ 1,810,033 $ 110,228

Cool Roof $ 28,335 $ 21,602

Residential Efficiency Total $ 23,333,530 $ 23,572,191 $ 29,863,893 $ 27,823,698 $ 35,821,102 $ 28,727,940

Large Lighting $ 5,002,420 $ 3,867,345 $ 7,893,213 $ 18,828,995 $ 9,108,233

Commercial HVAC $ 2,577,774 $ 2,910,793 $ 3,005,455 $ 4,041,964 $ 160,815

Commercial New Construction $ 790,724 $ 1,957,863 $ 408,819 $ 1,091,948

Commercial Custom $ 753,863 $ 350,950 $ 399,600 $ 694,006 $ 17,121 $ 363,554

LED Street Lights $ 1,008,723

Motors

Window Film

Roof Coating


Lean Clean Energy

Commercial Solutions $ 941,405 $ 5,949,118 $ 6,998,867

Schools & Institutions $ 640,573 $ 2,542,893 $ 3,090,894

Small Business Solutions $ 419,549 $ 1,576,813 $ 3,336,207


56

Program Total Program Expenditure ($)

FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 20 2019

Whole Building Optimization $ 158,056 $ 664,058 $ 1,953,730

Commercial Efficiency Total $ 9,124,781 $ 10,095,674 $ 11,707,087 $ 26,816,496 $ 20,019,051 $ 15,743,252

Efficiency Total $ 32,458,311 $ 33,667,865 $ 41,570,980 $ 54,640,194 $ 55,840,153 $ 44,471,192

Smart Thermostat $ 5,904,319 $ 6,663,780 $ 5,135,257 $ 4,134,744 $ 2,648,642 $ 3,180,223

Home Manager $ 9,974,045 $ 9,557,039 $ 3,528,379 $ 3,533,717 $ 1,751,164 $ 614,841

Bring Your Own Thermostat $ 291,306 $ 631,590 $ 1,081,560 $ 1,503,498 $ 1,621,083

Window AC DR $ 420,363 $ 323,379

Nest Direct Install $ 2,783,340 $ 4,006,512

Behavioral DR $ 461,825 $ 430,458

Residential DR Total $ 15,878,364 $ 16,932,488 $ 9,618,605 $ 8,750,021 $ 9,148,469 $ 9,853,117

Emergency DR $ 119,098 $ 481,358

Commercial DR $ 4,985,758 $ 5,961,492 $ 5,201,887 $ 4,867,187 $ 4,249,715 $ 5,100,193

Auto DR $ 996,618 $ 1,815,399 $ 1,339,507 $ 657,454 $ 219,618

Commercial DR Total $ 4,985,758 $ 7,077,208 $ 7,498,644 $ 6,206,694 $ 4,907,169 $ 5,319,811

DR Total $ 20,864,122 $ 24,009,696 $ 17,117,249 $ 14,956,715 $ 14,055,638 $ 15,172,928

Community Solar $ 182,719 $ 1,415,701 $ 18,040

Solar Host SA $ 409,463 $ 78,323 $ 337,869 $ -

Solar Initiative $ 6,493,912 $ 6,984,760 $ 9,891,358 $ 36,788,012 $ 15,831,925 $ 15,774,557

Residential Solar Total $ 6,493,912 $ 6,984,760 $ 10,483,540 $ 38,282,036 $ 16,169,794 $15,792,597

Solar PV $ 4,212,287 $ 3,065,490 $ 2,486,702 $ 3,253,442 $ 3,666,970 $ 2,863,178

Commercial Solar Total $ 4,212,287 $ 3,065,490 $ 2,486,702 $ 3,253,442 $ 3,666,970 $ 2,863,178

Solar Total $ 10,706,199 $ 10,050,250 $ 12,970,242 $ 41,535,478 $ 19,836,764 $ 18,655,775

STEP Total $ 64,028,632 $ 67,727,811 $ 71,658,471 $111,132,387 $ 89,732,555 $ 78,299,895


57

Appendix C: Local Job Creation

STEP provides incentives for participants to invest in a variety of energy efficient and clean energy technologies. These investments grow energy service, installation, and other jobs while producing significant direct savings for participants, which frees up spending for households and reduces costs for businesses. STEP’s economic impact, in terms of jobs creation and economic development, is assessed using the economic modeling software IMPLAN.

This study finds that the STEP programs, between FY 2009 and FY 2019 cumulatively generated 7,500 local job-years14, $312 million in labor income, and $362 million in value added. Taking into account the effective useful life of equipment installed under the program, local job creation continues to FY 2048 and produces lifetime (FY 2009 to FY 2048) cumulative impacts of 23,400 net job-years, $1.1 billion in labor income, and $1.7 billion in value added in the Greater San Antonio Area.

Methodology

To estimate the economic impact of STEP, the IMPLAN model is used to estimate how investments, savings, and costs of STEP have impacted the Greater San Antonio Area economy. The IMPLAN model is a static input-output framework used to analyze the effects of an economic stimulus on pre-specified economic regions, in this case the eight-county San Antonio Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). The model includes 536 sectors based on the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS).

The model captures the fact that sectors are interdependent: one industry purchases inputs from other industries and households (e.g., labor), and then produces and sells outputs to other industries, households, and government entities. Therefore, economic activity in one sector causes an increased flow of money throughout the economy. IMPLAN’s outputs include three types of impacts:

• Direct impacts, which are impacts in the primary industries where investments made by STEP and its participants are focused. For example, installing rooftop solar requires direct construction jobs.

• Indirect impacts, which are impacts in the industries that supply or interact with the primary industries. For example, building new energy efficient structures requires the purchase of construction-related building materials, which requires workers and output from sectors producing those materials.

• Induced impacts, which represent increased spending by workers who earn money due to the proposed projects, such as when construction workers use their wages at local restaurants.

The results of this analysis are reported using four metrics:

• Employment, which represents the job-years created in each industry, based on the output per worker for each industry.

• Labor Income, which includes all forms of employment income generated by the direct input, including employee compensation (wages and benefits) and proprietor income.

• Gross Regional Product (Value Added), which is the net value of output, including labor income, indirect business taxes, and business income.

• Output, which represents the total value of industry activity generated by the direct spending.

14 When presenting cumulative impacts we refer to job-years and annual impacts refer to jobs. These result represent the same thing as an annual job is one job-year. As a static model, IMPLAN is unable to estimate how long a job is permanent for. So, for example, 10 job-years could be interpreted as 1 individual employed for 10 years or 10 individuals for a single year.


58

Figure 24 offers a visual representation of the models inputs and outputs.

Figure 24. IMPLAN Model Schematic

Modeling Inputs

Two scenarios were considered when analyzing the impacts of STEP: a net scenario and a gross scenario. The gross scenario considered all the economic impacts supported by activity under the STEP programs, while the net scenario estimated the impacts the program has incentivized, which would not have occurred without the program.

STEP, over its lifetime and beyond, has impacted the region through multiple pathways, from investments in running the program to electric bill savings that result from the program. Direct spending activities by CPS Energy and STEP participants included in the analysis are shown in Table 13. Administration and marketing, incentive investments, bill savings, and demand response payments are derived from STEP data. Participant investments were estimated using assumptions about the percent of total spending on a particular measure typically covered by an incentive, with the assumption that the participant pays the remainder.

Table 13. Economic Analysis Inputs, FY 2009-FY 2019 ($ million).



Admin & Marketing Spending by CPS to run and advertise the program. $48 $48

Incentive Investments Incentive payments from CPS to program participants. $497 $497


59



Participant Investments Investments made by participants in the program. $842 $881

Residential Bill Savings Residential bill savings due to decreased grid electricity consumption.

$310 $338

Commercial Bill Savings Commercial bill savings due to decreased grid electricity consumption.

$282 $316

Residential DR Payments Payments made by CPS to residential participants in demand-response programs.

$48 $48

Commercial DR Payments Payments made by CPS to commercial participants in demand-response programs.

$47 $47

Factors Decreasing Consumer and Business Spending:


Program Funding Cost to residents of the Greater San Antonio Area to run STEP. Program funding was collected through increased electricity rates.

($640) ($640)

Participant Cost Cost STEP participants to participate in the program. This is the income/revenue spent on energy efficiency upgrades that could have been spent elsewhere in the economy.

($842) ($881)


Commercial and residential bill savings continue for the lifetimes of the products purchased during program years. To account for the impacts of these savings, effective useful life (EUL) from the Texas TRM is used to estimate cumulative bill savings for each measure. The longest EUL is 30 years and therefore there are cumulative bill savings from FY 2019, when the last measures are installed, to FY 2048. The total bill savings from FY 2020 to FY 2048 are shown in Table 14.

Table 14. Bill Savings, FY 2020-FY 2048 ($ million).

Input Category Net Gross

Residential Bill Savings $1,099 $1,136

Commercial Bill Savings $830 $919


Mapping Inputs to IMPLAN

The investments in Table 13 represent aggregated spending on a variety of STEP programs, which cover multiple measures. Different measures must be produced, sold, and installed by different sectors of the economy. Therefore, when input to IMPLAN, the investments made for each measure are mapped to sectors assumed to be directly impacted by those investments within the IMPLAN model. Total spending (program spending and participant spending) is split into installation costs, margins (retail markup), and direct investments in the measure being installed. Installation is typically mapped to the construction sector and direct spending on the measure is mapped to the sector producing it. For example, programs involving residential refrigeration are mapped to NAICS 335222; household refrigerator and home freezer manufacturing.

Bill savings and program costs are assumed to impact households and businesses differently. For households, bill savings are assumed to increase household income, which represents additional spending in the economy. Costs are represented as decreases to income, resulting in less spending in the economy.


60

For businesses, there are some limitations in the ability to model changes in their spending on energy. Costs and savings to businesses are modeled in IMPLAN as changes to output, which is a conservative assumption for two reasons. First, savings or costs of the program impact the production costs for businesses, which in a static IO model can only be approximated with changes to output. Second, this treats two different behaviors in the same way. In the long run, electricity savings reduce the cost of doing business and produce benefits, which align with the rationale for businesses to implement energy saving measures. In the short run, up-front investments required to purchase and install equipment are treated as increased costs to doing business, resulting in negative economic impacts. However, it is unlikely that businesses are making decisions to participate in programs that would result in short-term hardship. Therefore, the negative impact of the upfront, short-term costs to businesses is likely an over-estimate.

Net versus Gross Impacts

To differentiate between the net and gross scenarios, all the inputs are modified by net-to-gross ratios that proxy the amount of investments and bill savings that occur because of STEP. The net-to-gross ratios used are the same ones that were used to determine energy savings that have occurred because of the program that would not have occurred otherwise. This is assumed to be a reasonable proxy for investments incentivized by STEP that would not have occurred otherwise.

Results

Between FY 2009 and FY 2019, STEP is estimated to have cumulatively supported over 7,500 net job-years and $312 million in net labor income. On average, the annual net impact of the program was 680 jobs and $28 million in income. These values for the net scenario are presented in Table 15. The negative induced impacts reflect that costs to participants were higher than bill savings from FY 2009 to FY 2019. Beyond FY 2019, savings continue, generating positive induced impacts in the long run.

As discussed previously, the modeling may overestimate negative impacts to businesses. On the other side, bill savings represent a loss of revenue for CPS, with some ability to adjust electricity rates to recover revenue. The modeling does not include the negative impact from slightly increasing electricity rates to recover lost revenue, as IMPLAN is not able to incorporate price effects. The net effect of both overestimating and underestimating negative impacts is not quantified but is not expected to change the overall message of the results, which is that STEP drove positive net economic impacts for the Greater San Antonio Area.

Table 15. Net FY 2009-FY 2019 Economic Impacts (2019 $ millions).

Impact Type Employment

(# of job-years) Labor Income Total Value Added Output

Direct Effect 9,650 $335 $411 $724

Indirect Effect 1,690 $86 $141 $249

Induced Effect (2,410) ($109) ($190) ($332)

Total Effect 7,500 $312 $362 $642 Source: ICF analysis, numbers may not sum due to rounding

As expected, the gross impacts, presented in Table 16, are greater than net impacts. The direct effects of the net and gross scenarios are similar, but the negative effect of the induced impacts is significantly smaller due to higher gross bill savings, generating greater overall positive impacts.

Table 16.Gross FY 2009-FY 2019 Economic Impact (2019 $ millions).



Direct Effect 10,000 $347 $427 $753

Indirect Effect 1,750 $89 $146 $259


61

Induced Effect (2,160) ($98) ($171) ($298)

Total Effect 8,110 $339 $403 $714 Source: ICF analysis, numbers may not sum due to rounding

Figure 25 illustrates the annual impact of STEP on local job creation. Initially, the program’s employment impact was small, but as the program expanded and bill savings accumulated, the number of jobs supported increased. Because of high NTG ratios, there is minimal difference between the annual impacts of the net and gross scenarios.

Figure 25. Local Job Impacts, FY 2009-FY 2019

Source: ICF analysis

As previously discussed, commercial and residential bill savings continue until the useful life of products purchased through STEP end. Savings are anticipated to extend to FY 2048 based on EUL, and the impact of savings on the Greater San Antonio Area are included in the net and gross scenarios below. The inclusion of lifetime bill savings causes the induced effects to become positive as the long-run bill savings are larger than costs of the program. Including the lifetime impact of bill savings increases the total cumulative impact of the net scenario to 23,440 job-years and $1.1 billion in labor income, as shown in Table 17.

Table 17. Net FY 2009-FY 2048 Economic Impact (2019 $ millions).



Direct Effect 13,220 $545 $815 $1,453

Indirect Effect 3,860 $194 $312 $576

Induced Effect 7,780 $351 $607 $1,052

Total Effect 23,440 $1,089 $1,734 $3,081 Source: ICF analysis, numbers may not sum due to rounding

In the gross scenario, examining impacts up to FY 2048 increases STEP’s total impact to 25,150 job-years and over $1.2 billion in labor income, as shown in Table 18.

148

1,541

164

1,620

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,800


Nu

mb

er o

f Jo

bs

Net Gross


62

Table 18: Gross FY 2009-FY 2048 Economic Impact (2019 $ millions).



Direct Effect 13,940 $579 $874 $1,559

Indirect Effect 4,150 $209 $335 $620

Induced Effect 8,530 $384 $665 $1,153

Total Effect 25,150 $1,172 $1,875 $3,332

Source: ICF analysis, numbers may not sum due to rounding

Accordingly, STEP has played an important role, supporting the Greater San Antonio Area economy by driving net positive economic impacts, whether considering impacts during program years of FY 2009 to FY 2019, or over the EUL of the measures installed (i.e., FY 2009 to FY 2048). This economic activity is produced by incentivizing local investment in energy-efficient measures and clean energy technologies. It supports local jobs and generates energy savings, freeing up money for households to spend and increasing the long-term competitiveness of businesses as they reduce electricity expenditures.

STEP supported cumulative net impact of 7,500 local job-years, $312 million in labor income, and $362 million in value added between FY 2009 and FY 2019. Local job creation continues beyond the FY 2009 to FY 2019 time period due to continued bill savings. These savings, lasting up to FY 2048, are estimated to support an additional net 15,940 annual job-years, $777 in income, and $1.4 billion in value added. Altogether, the program is estimated to produce lifetime impacts of 23,440 net job-years, $1.1 billion in labor income, and $1.7 billion in value added in the Greater San Antonio Area.


63

Appendix D: Emission Reduction Equivalency Results

Greenhouse gas emissions from:

CO2 emissions from:

Greenhouse gas emissions avoided by:

Carbon sequestered by:


64

Appendix E: Cost-Effectiveness Heat Maps

This appendix contains a set of heat map tables with the cost-effectiveness metrics data reported for each program. These allow for easy

identification of high and low values. Some of the data was not available for all years but what data is available has been reported. DR

programs are supplied in a separate table due to the high $/kWh values washing out the nuance in values for the efficiency and solar

programs.

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019 Avg FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019 Avg FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019 Avg

Residential Lighting 1.1 0.9 0.8 1.0 912$ 707$ 239$ 744$ 0.028$ 0.027$ 0.038$ 0.028$

Home Efficiency 1.5 0.9 0.8 1.7 1.7 3.6 2.8 3.0 2.0 148$ 192$ 229$ 92$ 107$ 47$ 67$ 58$ 89$ 0.026$ 0.025$ 0.030$ 0.026$ 0.026$ 0.018$ 0.023$ 0.020$ 0.024$

Residential HVAC 2.5 2.1 2.3 3.3 4.4 2.9 3.8 4.2 3.2 78$ 73$ 70$ 50$ 34$ 56$ 47$ 36$ 50$ 0.023$ 0.022$ 0.020$ 0.015$ 0.017$ 0.021$ 0.017$ 0.016$ 0.018$

Air Flow Performance 0.5 0.4 0.4 1.0 1.2 0.7 144$ 141$ 156$ 104$ 115$ 128$ 0.068$ 0.087$ 0.090$ 0.048$ 0.047$ 0.062$

New Home Construction 3.5 2.8 2.5 6.0 5.1 1.5 1.5 3.8 35$ 35$ 36$ 33$ 43$ 68$ 73$ 37$ 0.008$ 0.007$ 0.008$ 0.007$ 0.008$ 0.047$ 0.051$ 0.008$

Refrigerator Recycling 3.5 1.9 1.2 1.5 1.1 1.0 1.9 241$ 299$ 463$ 263$ 300$ 319$ 297$ 0.022$ 0.028$ 0.042$ 0.035$ 0.043$ 0.043$ 0.031$

Weatherization 0.3 0.3 0.6 0.5 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.7 305$ 232$ 251$ 321$ 154$ 159$ 178$ 204$ 0.102$ 0.073$ 0.062$ 0.084$ 0.070$ 0.065$ 0.073$ 0.072$

WashRight 0.8 0.8 98$ 98$ 0.041$ 0.041$

New Home Construction - Franklin 1.3 1.5 1.4 89$ 91$ 90$ 0.060$ 0.056$ 0.057$

Retail Channel Partnerships 2.4 2.4 2.7 2.5 82$ 86$ 121$ 93$ 0.013$ 0.013$ 0.012$ 0.013$

AC/Duct Tune up 1.0 1.0 201$ 201$ 0.068$ 0.068$

Energy Savings Through Schools 0.9 1.1 1.4 1.1 390$ 349$ 350$ 365$ 0.037$ 0.026$ 0.021$ 0.028$

Home Energy Assessments 0.8 0.9 0.8 310$ 400$ 328$ 0.042$ 0.038$ 0.041$

Multi-Family 1.2 2.0 0.8 1.8 199$ 108$ 412$ 121$ 0.021$ 0.015$ 0.043$ 0.016$

Cool Roof 0.4 2.8 1.5 472$ 53$ 107$ 0.148$ 0.046$ 0.075$

Residential Efficiency Total 2.4 1.2 0.8 1.5 1.3 1.3 1.5 1.5 1.4 72$ 103$ 130$ 112$ 131$ 114$ 113$ 105$ 113$ 0.018$ 0.025$ 0.035$ 0.028$ 0.041$ 0.045$ 0.032$ 0.038$ 0.034$

Large Lighting 2.5 1.9 2.1 2.9 3.3 3.3 3.3 2.8 57$ 56$ 42$ 52$ 57$ 49$ 61$ 53$ 0.010$ 0.010$ 0.010$ 0.007$ 0.008$ 0.008$ 0.008$ 0.009$

Commercial HVAC 1.7 1.9 2.1 3.5 4.0 2.4 1.0 2.6 94$ 42$ 36$ 42$ 53$ 92$ 252$ 53$ 0.031$ 0.027$ 0.027$ 0.017$ 0.017$ 0.023$ 0.052$ 0.022$

Commercial New Construction 0.0 2.4 2.8 6.7 8.8 4.6 5.2 44$ 40$ 29$ 14$ 42$ 31$ 0.008$ 0.007$ 0.004$ 0.005$ 0.006$ 0.005$

Commercial Custom 6.7 3.7 3.3 3.7 3.5 2.8 9.2 1.3 3.3 258$ 62$ 145$ 34$ 226$ 120$ 17$ 888$ 94$ 0.008$ 0.006$ 0.007$ 0.009$ 0.006$ 0.006$ 0.050$ 0.017$ 0.007$

LED Street Lights 0.4 2.9 1.1 0.039$ 0.007$ 0.009$

Roof Coating 1.1 0.6 0.9 463$ 339$ 408$ 0.049$ 0.044$ 0.047$

Restaurant Equipment 3.3 -$

Lean Clean Energy 54.4 -$ -$

Commercial Solutions 1.0 3.5 3.6 3.3 194$ 62$ 65$ 66$ 0.042$ 0.010$ 0.011$ 0.011$

Schools & Institutions 0.0 2.2 2.2 2.0 94$ 64$ 75$ 0.015$ 0.022$ 0.018$

Small Business Solutions 0.3 3.0 4.2 3.5 2,641$ 92$ 53$ 66$ 0.106$ 0.015$ 0.010$ 0.012$

Whole Building Optimization 0.0 0.6 0.9 0.8 509$ 335$ 366$ 0.074$ 0.046$ 0.051$

Commercial Efficiency Total 2.4 1.8 2.2 3.8 3.7 3.0 3.1 3.1 2.9 63$ 60$ 42$ 46$ 52$ 58$ 68$ 70$ 59$ 0.011$ 0.012$ 0.009$ 0.007$ 0.009$ 0.009$ 0.010$ 0.013$ 0.010$

Efficiency Total 2.4 1.5 1.2 2.2 1.9 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.0 66$ 72$ 82$ 78$ 91$ 77$ 92$ 89$ 83$ 0.014$ 0.015$ 0.020$ 0.015$ 0.021$ 0.016$ 0.018$ 0.023$ 0.018$

Community Solar 0.0 0.8 0.7 0.022$ 0.022$

Solar Host SA 0.0 0.5 0.9 1.0 0.4 8$ 12$ -$ 9$ 0.002$ 0.003$ -$ 0.002$

Solar Initiative 0.8 0.6 0.8 1.1 1.2 1.5 2.7 3.3 1.8 80$ 80$ 79$ 94$ 131$ 99$ 57$ 44$ 74$ 0.050$ 0.041$ 0.041$ 0.033$ 0.033$ 0.026$ 0.015$ 0.013$ 0.022$

Residential Solar Total 0.8 0.6 0.8 1.1 1.1 1.4 2.7 3.3 1.8 80$ 80$ 79$ 94$ 139$ 100$ 52$ 43$ 73$ 0.050$ 0.041$ 0.041$ 0.033$ 0.035$ 0.025$ 0.014$ 0.012$ 0.021$

Solar PV 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.3 1.4 1.3 2.3 6.5 1.7 80$ 80$ 67$ 80$ 107$ 114$ 67$ 21$ 63$ 0.053$ 0.046$ 0.038$ 0.029$ 0.028$ 0.030$ 0.017$ 0.006$ 0.023$

Commercial Solar Total 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.3 1.4 1.3 2.3 6.5 1.7 80$ 80$ 67$ 80$ 107$ 114$ 67$ 21$ 63$ 0.053$ 0.046$ 0.038$ 0.029$ 0.028$ 0.030$ 0.017$ 0.006$ 0.023$

Solar Total 0.8 0.7 0.9 1.2 1.2 1.4 2.6 3.8 1.8 80$ 80$ 73$ 89$ 132$ 101$ 55$ 37$ 71$ 0.051$ 0.044$ 0.040$ 0.032$ 0.033$ 0.025$ 0.014$ 0.011$ 0.021$

ProgramUtility Cost Test (UCT) Ratio Cost of Lifetime Peak Demand Savings Cost of Lifetime Energy Savings

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019 Avg FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019 Avg FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019 Avg

Smart Thermostat 1.7 5.5 4.7 0.5 1.1 1.7 3.1 3.6 2.5 361$ 134$ 161$ 167$ 137$ 138$ 75$ 85$ 150$ 4.98$ 4.17$ 5.74$ 7.16$ 5.12$ 5.58$ 2.38$ 3.46$ 4.78$

Home Manager 1.0 1.8 1.0 1.7 1.5 0.0 0.0 1.2 806$ 414$ 281$ 85$ 98$ 80$ 282$ 233$ 130$ 55.0$ 29.4$ 4.84$ 7.00$ 3.86$ 12.5$ 17.4$

Bring Your Own Thermostat 1.5 1.9 3.1 5.1 5.7 4.2 206$ 246$ 104$ 85$ 50$ 80$ 18.7$ 22.4$ 0.296$ 0.248$ 0.179$ 0.272$

Window AC DR 0.1 0.2 0.1 3,284$ 1,720$ 2,354$ 173$ 281$ 208$

Nest Direct Install 2.9 3.2 3.1 512$ 175$ 240$ 1.18$ 0.525$ 0.680$

Behavioral DR 2.9 2.5 2.7 147$ 57$ 83$ 18.4$ 0.762$ 1.51$

Residential DR Total 1.6 2.2 2.9 0.8 1.4 1.8 2.8 3.5 2.1 375$ 349$ 261$ 224$ 117$ 114$ 109$ 96$ 173$ 5.17$ 14.6$ 13.1$ 13.3$ 5.46$ 1.79$ 0.913$ 0.540$ 2.37$

Emergency DR 2.8 4.8 4.4 27$ 97$ 64$ 26.6$ 24.3$ 24.7$

Commercial DR 1.1 0.9 0.9 1.5 2.8 2.5 2.3 2.3 1.8 73$ 73$ 75$ 73$ 78$ 74$ 78$ 64$ 73$ 2.48$ 1.67$ 2.05$ 3.41$ 2.40$ 1.85$ 1.35$ 1.92$ 2.04$

Auto DR 0.4 0.5 1.5 4.4 3.1 1.3 534$ 513$ 238$ 91$ 55$ 226$ 49.2$ 22.3$ 8.98$ 2.42$ 1.79$ 7.79$

Commercial DR Total 1.1 0.9 0.9 1.3 2.4 2.3 2.5 2.3 1.8 73$ 73$ 75$ 80$ 99$ 86$ 80$ 64$ 79$ 2.48$ 1.67$ 2.05$ 3.99$ 3.30$ 2.24$ 1.44$ 1.91$ 2.25$

DR Total 1.4 1.9 2.4 1.0 1.8 2.0 2.7 3.1 2.0 156$ 187$ 164$ 147$ 109$ 101$ 97$ 82$ 125$ 3.77$ 5.28$ 5.73$ 7.88$ 4.25$ 1.95$ 1.05$ 0.722$ 2.33$

ProgramUtility Cost Test (UCT) Ratio Cost of Lifetime Peak Demand Savings Cost of Lifetime Energy Savings


65